Skip to main content

Full text of "A history of Sumer and Akkad : an account of the early races of Babylonia from prehistoric times to the foundation of the Babylonian monarchy"

See other formats

•iJiH:; * 

Stele of Naram-Sin, king of Agade, 

representing the king and his allies in triumph over their 


1\ 1 ' 1 


i.^^^ 1 I Lj f ^w • -v f I » > ^m I I I 

^W^sto-r•^( o^ Babylon t*a and A-ssY"^^**- 










Assistant Keeper of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities in the British Museum, 

Professor of Assyrian and Babylonian Archeology in 

the University of London 









REPRINTED I916 & I923 




THE excavations carried out in Babylonia and 
Assyria during the last few years have added 
immensely to our knowledge of the early 
history of those countries, and have revolutionized many 
of the ideas current with regard to the age and character 
of Babylonian civilization. In the present volume, 
which deals with the history of Sumer and Akkad, an 
attempt is made to present this new material in a 
connected form, and to furnish the reader with the 
results obtained by recent discovery and research, so far 
as they affect the earliest historical periods. An account 
is here given of the dawn of civilization in Mesopotamia, 
and of the early city-states which were formed from 
time to time in the lands of Sumer and Akkad, t he two 
p- reat divisio ^? | into which B abyl onians at t h at p ^^d 
di^SeoTThe primitive sculpture an^tne^rcTISeologica! 
refirSms, discovered upon early Babylonian sites, enable 
us to form a fairly complete picture of the races which 
in those remote ages inhabited the country. By their 
help it is possible to realize how the primitive conditions 
of life were gradually modified, and how from rude 
beginnings there was developed the comparatively 
advanced civilization, which was inherited by the later 
Babylonians and Assyrians and exerted a remarkable 
influence upon other races of the ancient world. 

In the course of this history points are noted at 
which early contact with other lands took place, and it 


has been found possible in the historic period to trace 
the paths by ^vhich Siniierian cultin*ewas carried beyond 
the hmits of Babylonia. Even in prehistoric times it is 
probable that the great trade routes of the later epoch 
were already open to traffic, and cultural connections 
may well have taken place at a time when political 
contact cannot be historically proved. This fact must 
be borne in mind in any treatment of the early relations 
of Babylonia with Egypt. As a result of recent exca- 
vation and research it has been found necessary to 
modify the view that Egyptian culture in its earlier 
stages was strongly influenced by that of Babylonia. 
But certain parallels are too striking to be the result of 
coincidence, and, although the southern Sumerian sites 
have yielded traces of no prehistoric culture as early as 
that of the Neolithic and predynastic Egyptians, yet 
the Egyptian evidence suggests that some contact may 
have taken place between the prehistoric peoples of 
North Africa and Western Asia. 

Far closer were the ties which connected Sumer 
with Elam, the great centre of civilization which lay 
upon her eastern border, and recent excavations in 
Persia have disclosed the extent to which each civiliza- 
tion was of independent development. It was only 
after the Semitic conquest that Sumerian culture had a 
marked eflect on that of Elam, and Semitic influence 
persisted in the country even under Sumerian domina- 
tion. It was also through the Semitic inhabitants of 
northern Babylonia that cultural elements from both 
Sumer and Elam passed beyond the Taurus, and, after 
being assimilated by the Hittites, reached the western 
and south-western coasts of Asia Minor. An attempt 
has therefore been made to estimate, in the light of 
recent discoveries, the manner in which Babylonian 
culture affected the early civilizations of Egypt, Asia, 
and the West. ^Vhether through direct or indirect 


channels, the cultural influence of Sumer and Akkad 
was felt in varying degrees throughout an area extend- 
ing from Elam to the Aegean. 

In view of the after effects of this early civilization, 
it is of importance to determine tlie region of the world 
from which the Sumerian race reached the Euphrates. 
Until recently it was only possible to form a theory on 
the subject from evidence furnished by the Sumerians 
themselves. But explorations in Turkestan, the results 
of which have now been fully published, enable us to 
conclude with some confidence that the orig inal home 
of the Sumerian race i s to be sougTit beyond the mou n- 
tams ro liie easi oi tne Balf^T^maTi plilUl. "T n^xcava- 
^onsTonSucTeT^t^SiauiiearaTsHiaDa^ the second 
Pumpelly Expedition have revealed traces of prehistoric 
cultures in that region, which present some striking 
parallels to other early cultures west of the Iranian 
plateau. ISIoreover, the physiographical evidence col- 
lected by the first Pumpelly Expedition affords an 
adequate explanation of the racial unrest in Central 
Asia, which probably gave rise to the Sumerian immi- 
gration and to other subsequent migrations from the 

It has long been suspected that a marked change 
in natural conditions must have taken place during 
historic times throughout considerable areas in Central 
Asia. The present comparatively arid condition of 
Mongolia, for example, is in striking contrast to what 
it must have been in the era preceding the INIongolian 
invasion of Western Asia in the thirteenth century, and 
travellers who have followed the route of Alexander's 
army, on its return from India through Afghanistan 
and Persia, have noted the difference in the character 
of the country at the present day. Evidence of a 
similar change in natural conditions has now been 
collected in Russian Turkestan, and the process is 


also illustrated as a result of tlie explorations conducted 
by Dr. Stein, on behalf of the Indian Government, on 
the borders of tlie Taklaniakan Desert and in the oases 
of Khotan. It is clear that all these districts, at 
different periods, were far better watered and more 
densely populated than they are to-day, and that 
clianij^es in climatic conditions have reacted on the 
character of the country in such a Avay as to cause 
racial migrations. Moreover, there are indications that 
the general trend to aridity has not been uniform, 
and that cycles of greater aridity have been followed 
by periods when the country was capable of supporting 
a considerable population. These recent observations 
have an important bearing on the Sumerian problem, 
and they have therefore been treated in some detail 
in Appendix I. 

The physical effects of such climatic changes would 
naturally be more marked in mid-continental regions 
than in districts nearer the coast, and the immigration 
of Semitic nomads into Syria and Northern Babylonia 
may possibly have been caused by similar periods of 
aridity in Central Arabia. However this may be, it 
is certain that the early Semites reached the Euphrates 
by way of the Syrian coast, and founded their first 
Babylonian settlements in Akkad. It is still undecided 
whether tliey or the Sumerians were in earliest occu- 
pation of Babylonia. The racial character of the 
Sumerian gods can best be explained on the supposition 
that the earliest cult-centres in the country were 
Semitic ; but the absence of Semitic idiom from the 
earliest Sumerian inscriptions is equally valid evidence 
against the theory. The point will probably not be 
settled until excavations have been undertaken at 
such North Babylonian sites as El-Ohemir and Tell 

That the Sumerians played the more important 


part in originating and moulding Babylonian culture 
is certain. In government, law, literature and art the_ 
"Semites merely borrowed from their Sumerian teachers, 
and, although in some respects they improved upon 
their models, in each case the original impulse came 
from the Sumerian race. Hammurabi's Code of Laws, 
for example, which had so marked an influence on the 
Mosaic legislation, is now proved to have been of 
Sumerian origin ; and recent research has shown that 
the later religious and mythological literature of 
Babylonia and Assyria, by which that of the Hebrews 
was also so strongly affected, was largely derived from 
Sumerian sources. 

The early history of Sumer and Akkad is dominated 
by the racial conflict between Semites and Sumerians, 
in the course of which the latter were gradually worsted. 
The foundation of the Babylonian monarchy marks the 
,close of the political career of the Sumerians as a 
ce,~ although, as we have seen, their cultural achieve- 
ments long survived them in the later civilizations of 
Western Asia. The designs upon the cover of this 
volume may be taken as symbolizing the dual character 
of the early population of the country. Tlie panel 
on the face of the cover represents two Semitic heroes, 
or mythological beings, watering the humped oxen or 
buffaloes of the Babylonian plain, and is taken from 
the seal of Ibni-Sharru, a scribe in the service of 
the early Akkadian king Shar-Gani-sharri. The panel 
on the back of the binding is from the Stele of the 
V^ultures and portrays the army of Eannatum trampling 
on the dead bodies of its foes. The shaven faces of 
the Sumerian warriors are in striking contrast to 
tlie heavily bearded Semitic type upon the seal. 

A word should, perhaps, be said on two further 
subjects — the early chronology and the rendering of 
Sumerian proper names. The general effect of recent 


^ m 



research has been to reduce the very early dates, which 
were formerly in vogue. But there is a distinct danger 
of the reaction going too far, and it is necessary to 
mark clearly the points at which evidence gives place 
to conjecture. It must be admitted that all dates 
anterior to the foundation of the Babylonian monarchy 
are necessarily approximate, and while we are without 
definite points of contact between the earlier and later 
chronology of Babylonia, it is advisable, as far as 
possible, to think in periods. In the Chronological 
Table of early kings and rulers, which is printed as 
Appendix II., a scheme of chronology has been 
attempted ; and the grounds upon which it is based 
are summarized in the third chapter, in which the age 
of the Sumerian civilization is discussed. 

The transliteration of many of the Sumerian proper 
names is also provisional. This is largely due to the 
polyphonous character of the Sumerian signs ; but 
there is also no doubt that the Sumerians themselves 
frequently employed an ideographic system of expres- 
sion. The ancient name of the city, the site of which 
is marked by the mounds of Tello, is an instance in 
point. The name is written in Sumerian as Shirpurla, 
with the addition of the determinative for place, and 
it was formerly assumed that the name was pro- 
nounced as Shirpurla by the Sumerians. But there is 
little doubt that, though written in that way, it was 
actually pronounced as Lagash, even in the Sumerian 
period. Similarly the name of its near nciglibour and 
ancient rival, now marked by the mounds of Jokha, 
was until recently rendered as it is written, Gishkhu 
or Gishukh ; but we now know from a bilingual list 
that tlie name was actually pronounced as Umma. 
The reader will readily understand that in the case of 
less famous cities, whose names have not yet been 
found in the later syllabaries and bilingual texts, the 


phonetic readings may eventually have to be discarded. 
When the renderings adopted are definitely provisional, 
a note has been added to that effect. 

1 take this opportunity of thanking Dr. E. A. Wallis 
Budge for permission to publish photographs of objects 
illustrating the early history of Sumer and Akkad, 
which are preserved in the British JNluseum. JMy 
thanks are also due to INIonsieur Ernest Leroux, of 
Paris, for kindly allowing me to make use of illustra- 
tions from works published by him, which have a 
bearing on the excavations at Tello and the develop- 
ment of Sumerian art ; to Mr. Raphael Pumpelly and 
the Carnegie Institution of Washington, for permission 
to reproduce illustrations from the official records of 
the second Pumpelly Expedition ; and to the editor 
of Nature for kindly allowing me to have cliches made 
from blocks originally prepared for an article on 
" Transcaspian Archaeology," which I contributed to 
that journal. With my colleague, Mr. H. R. Hall, 
I have discussed more than one of the problems con- 
nected with the early relations of Egypt and Babylonia;; 
and INIonsieur F. Thureau-Dangin, Conservateur-adjoint 
of the Museums of the Louvre, has readily furnished 
me with information concerning doubtfVil readings upon 
historical monuments, both in the Louvre itself, and in 
the Imperial Ottoman ^Museum during his recent visit 
to Constantinople. I should add that the plans and 
drawings in the volume are the work of ISlr. P. C. Carr, 
who has spared no pains in his attempt to reproduce 
with accuracy the character of the originals. 

L. W. KIXG. 






Irend of recent arcliaeological research — Tlie study of origins — The 
Neolithic period in tlie Aegean area, in the region of the Mediter- 
ranean, and in tlie, Nile Valley— Scarcity of Neolithic remains in 
Bahylonia due argely to cliaracter of the country — I'rohlenis raised 
by excavations in Persia and Russian Turkestan — Comparison of the 
earliest cultural remains in Egypt and Babylonia — The eai-liest 
known inhabitants of South Babylonian sites — The "Sumerian Con- 
troversy " and a shifting of the problem at issue — Early relations 
of Sumerians and Semites — The lands of Sumer and Akkad — 
Natural boundaries — Influence of geological structure— Effect of 
river deposits — Euphrates and the Persian Gulf— Comparison of 
Tigris and Euphrates — The Shaft en-Nil and the Shaft el-Kur — The 
early course of Euphrates and a tendency of the river to break away 
« cstward — Changes in the swamps — Distribution of population and 
the position of early cities — Rise and fall of the rivers and the 
regulation of the Avater — Boundary bcitween Sumer and Akkad — 
Early names for Jiabylonia — '-'riic Land" and its significance — 
Terminology ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i 




Characteristics of early Babylonian sites— The French c.\ca\ations at 
Tello — The names Shirpurla and Lagash — Results of De Sarzec's 
work — German excavations at Surghul and El-Hibba — The so-called 
'^fire-necropoles" — Jokha and its ancient name — Other mounds in 
the region of the Shaft el-Ka,r — Hammam — Tell 'Id— Systematic 
excavations at Fara (Shuruppak) — Sumerian dwelling-houses and 
circular buildings of unknown use — Sarcophagus-graves and mat- 
burials — Differences in burial customs — Diggings at Abu Ilatab 
(Kisurra) — Pot-bin-ials — Partial examination of Bisniaya (Adab) — 
Hetime — Jidr — The fate of cities which escaped the Western 
Semites — American excavations at Nippur — British work at Warka 
(Erech), Senkera (Larsa), Tell Sifr, Tell Medina, Mukayyar (f i}, 
Abu Shahrain (Eridu), and Tell Lalnn — Our knowledge of North 
Babylonian sites — Excavations at Abu Habba (Sippar), and recent 
work at Babylon and Borsip[ia — The sites of Agade, Cutha, Kish 
and Opis — The French excavations at Susa — Sources of our informa- 
tion on the racial problem — Sumerian and Semitic types^ — Contrasts 




in treatment of the hair, physical features, and dress — Apparent 
inconsistencies — Evidence of the later and the earlier monuments — 
Evidence from the racial character of Sumerian gods — Professor 
Meyer's theory and the linguistic evidence — Present condition 
of the problem — Tiie original home and racial afTniity of tlie 
Sumerians — Patli of the Semitic conquest — Origin of the ^\^e3tern 
Semites — The eastern limits of Semitic influence ... 10 




Effect of recent research on older systems of chronology — Reduction of 
very early dates and articulation of historical periods — Danger of 
the reaction going too far and the necessity for noting where 
evidence gives place to conjecture — Chronology of tlie remoter ages 
and our sources of information — Classification of material — Bases 
of the later native li.><ts and the chronological system of Berossus 
— Palaeography and systematic excavation — Relation of the early 
chronology to that of the later periods — Effect of recent archaeo- 
logical and epigrapliic evidence — ^Tlie process of reckoning from 
below and the foundations on which we may build — Points upon 
wliich there is still a difference of opinion — ^Date for the foundation 
of the Babylonian Monarchy — Approximate character of all earlier 
dates and the need to think in periods — Probable dates for tlie 
Dynasties of Ur and Isin — Dates for the earlier epochs and for the 
first traces of Sumerian civilization — Pre-Babylonian invention of 
cuneiform writing — Tlie origins of Sumerian culture to be traced 
to an age when it was not Sumerian — Relative interest attaching 
to many Sumerian achievements— Noteworthy character of the 
Sumerian arts of sculpture and engraving — The respective con- 
tributions of Sumerian and Semite — Methods of composition in 
Sumerian sculpture and attempts at an unconventional treatment — 
Perfection of detail in the best Sumerian work — Casting in metal 
and the question of copper or bronze — Solid and hollow castings 
and copper plating — Terra-cotta figurines — The arts of inlaying and 
engraving — The more fantastic side of Sumerian art — Gro^vth of a 
naturalistic treatment in Sumerian design — Period of decadence ... 66 




Origin of the great cities — Local cult-centres in tlie prehistoric period — 
The earliest Sumerian settlements — Development of the city-god and 
evolution of a pantheon — Lunar and solar cults — Gradual growth 
of a city illustrated by the early history of Nipj)ur and its shrine — 
Buildings of the earliest Sumerian period at Tello — Store-houses 
and washing-places of a primitive agricultural community — The 
inhabitants of the country as portrayed in archaic sculpture — 
Pearliest written records and the prehistoric system of land tenure — 
The first rulers of Shurupp.ik and their ofHce— Kings and patesis 
of early city-states — The dawn of history in Lagash and the 




suzerainty of Kish — Rivalry of Lagaph and Uninia and tlic Treaty of 
Mesilim — The ro/e of tlie city-god and the theocratic fcehng of the 
time — Early struggles of Kis-h for supremacy — Connotation of 
royal titles in the early Sumerian period — Ur-Ninit the founder of 
a dynasty in Lagash— His reign and policj- — His sons and household 
— The position of Sumerian women in social and official life — The 
status of Lagash under A kurgal ... ... ... ... ... 84 





Condition of Sumer on the accession of Eannatum — Outbreak of war 
between Umma and Lagash — Raid of Ningirsu's territory and 
Eannatum's vision — The defeat of Ush, patesi of Umma, and the 
terms of peace imposed on his successor — The frontier-ditch and 
the stelae of delimitation — Ratification of the treaty at the frontier- 
shrines — Oath-formulae upon the Stele of the Vultures — Original 
form of the Stele and the fragments that have been recovered — Re- 
constitution of the scenes upon it — Ningirsu and his net — Eannatum 
in battle and on the march — Weapons of the Sumeriaus and their 
method of fighting in close phalanx — Shield-bearers and lance- 
bearers — Subsidiary use of the battle-axe — The royal arms and body- 
guard — The burial of the dead after battle — Order of Eannatum's 
conquests — Relations of Kish and L'ninia — llie defeat of Kish, Opis 
and Mari, and Eannatum's suzerainty in the north— Date of his 
southern conquests and evidence of his authority in Sinner — His 
relations with Elam. and the other groups of his campaigns — Position 
of Lagash under Eainiatum — His system of irrigation — Estimate of 
his reign ... ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... 120 



Cause of break in the direct succession at Lagash — L nuna and Lagash in 
the reign of Enannatum L — Urlumnia's successful raid — His defeat 
by Entemena and the annexation of his citj' — Entemena's cone and 
its summary of historical events — Extent of Entemena's dominion — 
Sources for history of the period between Enannatum 11, and 
Urukagina — The relative order of Enetarzi, Enlitarzi and Lugal- 
anda — Period of unrest in Lagash — Secular authority of the chief 
priests and weakening of the patesiate — Struggles for the succession 
— The sealings of Lugal-anda and his wife — Break in traditions 
inaugurated by Urukagina — Causes of an increase in officialdom 
and oppression — The privileges of the city-god usurped by the 
patesi and his palace — 'I'ax -gatherers and inspectors " down to the 
sea" — Mi.sappropriation of sacred lands and temple property, and 
corruption of the priesthood — The reforms of Urukagina — Abolition 
of unnecessary posts and stamping out of abuses — Revision of burial 
fees — Penalties for theft and protection for the poorer classes — 
Abolition of diviner's fees and regulation of divorce — The laws of 
Urukagina and the Sumerian origin of Hammurabi's Code — Uruka- 
gina's relations to other cities — Effect of his reforms on the stability 
of the state— The fall of Lagash I'jI 





\ Close of an epoch in Siinieriau history — Increase in the power of L'nima 

\ and transference of the capital to Ercch — Extent of Lugal-za^-gisi's { 

empire, and liis expedition to the Mediterranean coast — Period of 1 

Lugal-kiguh-nidiulu and Lugal-kisalsi — Tlie dual kingdom of Erech 
and Ur — Enshagkushanna of Sumor and his struggle with Kish — 
Confederation of Kish and Opis — Enbi-Ishtar of Kish and a tempo- j 

rary cliock to Semitic expansion southwards — The later kingdom of ' 

Kish — Date of Urumush and extent of his empire — Economic con- " '| 

ditious in Akkad as revealed by the Obelisk of Manishtusu — Period 
of Manishtusu's reign and his military expeditions — His statues from 
Susa — Elam and the earlier Semites — A period of transition — New 
light on the foundations of the Akkadian Empire ... ... ,., 192 



Sargon of Agade and his significance — Early recognition of his place in 
history — The later traditions of Sargon and tlie contemporary 
records of Shar-Gani-sharri's reign — Discovery at Susa of a monu- 
ment of " Sharru-Gi, the King " — Probability that he was Manish- 
tusu's father and the founder of the kingdom of Kish — Who, then, 
was Sargon ? — Indications that only names and not facts have been 
confused in the tradition — The debt of Akkad to Kish in art and 
politics — Expansion of Semitic authority westward under Sliar-Gani- 
sharri — The alleged conquest of Cyprus — Commercial intercourse at 
the period and the disappearance of the city-state — Evidence of a 
policy of deportation — The conquest of Naram-Sin and the " King- 
dom of the Four Quartei-s " — His Stele of \'ictory and his relations 
with Elam — ^Naram-Sin at the upper reaches of the Tigris, and the 
history of the Pir Hussein Stele — Naram-Sin's successors — Repre- 
sentations of Semitic battle-scenes — llie Lagash Stele of Victory, 
firobably commemorating the original conquest of Kish by Akkad— 
ndependent Semitic principalities bej-ond the limits of Sumer and 
Akkad — Tlie reason of Akkadian pre-eminence and the deification 
of Semitic kiiigs 216 



Suraerian reaction tempered by Semitic influence — Length of the inter- 
vening period between the Sargonic era and that of Cr — Evidence 
from Lagash of a sequence of rulers in that city who bridge the 
gaj) — Archaeological and epigraphic data — Political condition of 
Sumer and the semi-indciiendent position enjoyed by Lagash — Ur- 
l?au representative of the earlier patcsis of this epoch — Increase in 
tlie authority of Ligash under Gudea — His conquest of Anshan — 
His relations with Syria, Arabia, and the Persian Gulf — His 
influence of a commercial rather than of a political character — 
Develojiment in the art of building which marked the later Sumerian 




period — Evolution of the Babylonian brick and evidence of new 
architectural ideas — The rebuilding of E-ninnu and the elaborate 
character of Sumerian ritual — ^Tlie art of Gudea's period — His reiarn 
the golden age of Lagash— Gudea's posthumous deification and his 
cult — ^The relations of his sou, Ur-Ningirsu, to the Dynasty of Ur 252 




Tlie part taken by Ur against Semitic domination in an earlier age, and 
her subsequent history — Organization of her resources under Ur- 
Engur — His claim to have founded the kingdom of Sumer and 
Akkad — The subjugation of Akkad by Dungi and the Sumerian 
national revival — Contrast in Dungi's treatment of Babylon and 
Eridu — Further evidence of Sumerian reaction — The conquests of 
Dungi's earlier years and his acquisition of regions formerly held 
by Akkad — His adoption of the bow as a national weapon — His 
Elamite campaigns and the difficulty in retaining control of con- 
quered provinces — His change of title and assumption of divine 
rank — Survival of Semitic influence in Elam under Sumerian domi- 
nation — Character of Dungi's Elamite administration — His reforms 
in the oflScial weight-standards and the system of time-reckoning — 
Continuation of Dungi's policy by his successors — The cult of the 
reigning monarch carried to extravagant lengths — Results of 
administrative centralization when accompanied by a complete 
delegation of authority by the king — Plurality of offices and pro- 
vincial misgovernment the principal causes of a decline in the 
power of Ur ... ... ... ... ... ... 278 




Continuity of the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad and the racial character 
of the kings of Isin — The Elamite invasion which put an end to the 
Dynasty of Ur — Native rulers of Elam represented by the dynasties 
of Khutran-tepti and Ebarti — Evidence that a change in titles did not 
reflect a revolution in the political condition of Elam — No period of 
Elamite control in Babylonia followed the fall of Ur — Sources for 
the history of the Dj-nasty of Isin — The family of Ishbi-Ura and tlie 
cause of a break in the succession — Rise of an independent kingdom 
in Larsa and Ur, and the possibility of a second Elamite invasion — 
The family of Ur-Ninib followed by a period of unrest in Isin — 
Relation of the Dynasty of Isin to that of Babylon — The suggested 
Amorite invasion in the time of Libit-Ishtar disproved — The capture 
of Isin in Sin-muballit's reign an episode in the war of Babylon with 
Larsa — The last kings of Isin and the foundation of the Babylonian 
Monarchy — Position of Babylon in the later historical periods, and 
the close of the independent political career of the Sumerians as a 
race — The survival of their cultural influence .•• 303 







Relations of Sumer and Akkad with other lands — Cultural influences, 
carried by the great trade-routes, often independent of political 
contact — The prehistoric relationship of Sumerian culture to tliat of 
Eirypt — Alleged traces of strong cultural influence — The hypothesis 
of a Semitic invasion of Upper Egypt in the light of more recent 
excavations — Character of the Neolithic and early dynastic cultures 
of Egypt, as deduced from a study of the early graves and their con- 
tents — Changes which may be traced to improvements in technical 
skill — Confirmation from a study of the skulls — Native origin of the 
Egj'ptian system of writing and absence of Babylonian influence — 
Misleading character of other cultural comparisons — Problem of the 
bulbous mace-head and the stone cylindrical seal — Prehistoric mi- 
grations of the cylinder — Semitic elements in Egyptian civilization 
— Syria a link in the historic period between the Euphrates and the 
Nile — Relations of Elam and Sumer — Evidence of early Semitic 
influence in Elamite culture and proof of its persistence — Elam prior 
to the Semitic conquest — The Proto-Elamite script of independent 
development — Its disappearance paralleled by tiiat of the Ilittite 
hieroglyphs — Character of the earlier strata of the mounds at Susa 
and presence of Neolithic remains— The prehistoric pottery of Susa 
and Mussian — Improbability of suggested connections between the 
cultures of Elam and of predynastic Egypt — More convincing 
parallels in Asia Minor and Russian Turkestan — Relation of the 
prehistoric peoples of Elam to the Elamites of history — The Neolithic 
settlement at Nineveh and the prehistoric cultures of Western Asia 
— Importance of Syria in the spread of Babylonian culture westward 
— The extent of early Babylonian influence in Cyprus, Crete, and 
the area of Ae^jean civilization ... ... ... ... ... ... 821 


I. Recent Explorations in Turkestan in their Relation to the 

Sumerian Prouleji ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 351 

II. A Chronological List of the Kincs and Rulers of Sumer and 

Akkad ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 359 

Index ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 363 



I. Stele of Naram-Siu, representing the king and his allies in 
triumph over their enemies ... ... ... Frontispiece 

II. Doorway of a building at Tello erected by Gudea ; on the 

left is a later building of the Seleucid Era 20 

III. Outer face of a foundation-wall at Tello, built by Ur-13au ... 2(3 

IV. Limestone figure of an early Sumerian patesi, or high official 40 
Y. Fragment of Sumerian sculpture representing scenes of 

worship ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 52 

VI. The Blau monuments ... ... ... ... ... ... G2 

VII. Piorite statue of Gudea, represented as the architect of the 

temple of Gatumdug ... ... ... ... ... ... OG 

VIII. Clay relief stamped with the figure of a Babj-lonian liero, and 
fragment of limestone sculjjtured in relief ; both objects 
illustrate the symbol of the spouting vase ... ... ... 72 

IX. Impressions of early cylinder-seals, engraved with scenes 

representing heroes and mythological beings in conflict 
with lions and bulls ... ... ... ... 70 

X. South-eastern facade of a building at Tello, erected by 

Ur-Nina '. 90 

XI. Limestone figures of early Sumerian rulers ... 102 

XII. Plaques of Ur-Nina and of Dudu 110 

XIII. Portion of the " Stele of the V^ultures '' sculptured witli scenes 

representing Eannatum leading liis troops in battle and on 

the march ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 124 

XIV. The burial of the dead after battle 138 

XV^. Portion of a black basalt mortar bearing an inscription of 

Eannatum ... ... ... ... ■•• ... ... 14G 

XVI. Brick of Eannatum, recording his genealogy and conquests 
and commemorating the sinking of a well in the temple of 
Ningirsu ... ... .-■ ... ... ••• ••• 154 

XVII. Marble gate-socket, bearing an inscription of Entemcna ... Ifi2 
XVIII. Silver vase dedicated to the god Ningirsu by Entcmena ... 168 
XIX. Mace-heads and part of a diorite statuette dedicated to various 

deities 200 

XX. Mace-head dedicated to the Sun-god by Shar-Gani sharri, 

and other votive objects ... ... •.• ... ••• 218 





XXI. Cruciform stone object inscribed with a votive text of an early 

Semitic king of ... ... ... ... ... ... 224 

XXII. Impressions of the cylinder-seals of Ubil-lshtar, Khasli- 

khamer, and Kilulla ... ... ... ... ... ... 21G 

XXIII. Clay cones of Galu-Babbar and other rulers 258 

XXIV, Brick pillar at Tcllo, of the time of Gudea 202 

XXV. Seated figure of Gudea 2G8 

XXVI. Votive cones and figui-es 272 

XXVII. Gate-socket of Gudea, recording the restoration of the temple 

of the goddess Nina ... ... ... ... 274 

XXVIII. Brick of Ur-Engur, King of Ur, recording the rebuilding of 

the temple of Ninni in Erech ... ... ... ... 280 

XXIX. Votive tablets of Dungi, King of Ur, and other rulers ... 288 

XXX. Clay tablets of temple-accounts, drawn up in Dungi's reign ... 292 

XXXI. Circular tablets of the reign of Bur-Sin, King of Ur... ... 298 

XXXII. Bricks of Bur-Sin, King of Ur, and Ishme-Dagan, King of Lsin 310 

XXXIII. Specimens of clay cones bearing votive inscriptions ... ... 314 

XXXIV. (i and ii) The North and South Kurgans at Anau in Russian 

Turkestan, (iii) Terra-cotta figurines of the copper age 

culture from the South Kurgan at Anau ... ... ... 352 




1-2. Figures of early Sumerians engraved upon fragments of shell. 

Earliest period : from Tcllo 
3-5. Later types of Sumerians, as exhibited by heads of male statuettes 
from Tello ... ... 

6-8. Examples of sculpture of the later period, representing different 
racial types 

9-11. Fragments of a circular bas-relief of the earliest period, com- 
memorating the meeting of two chieftains and their followers 

12. Limestone panel representing Gudea being led by Ningishzida 

and another deity into the presence of a seated god 

13. Figure of the seated god on the cylinder-seal of Gudea 

14-15. Examples of early Sumcriau deities on votive tablets from 

16. Fragment of an archaic relief from Tello, representing a god 

smiting a bound captive with a heavy club or mace ... 
17-19. Earlier and later forms of divine headdresses 

20. Perforated plaque engraved with a scene representing the pouring 

out of a libation before a goddess 

21. Fragments of sculpture belonging to the best period of Sumeriau 


22. Limestone head of a lion from the corner of a basin in Ningirsu's 


23. Upper part of a female statuette of diorite, of the period of 

Gudea or a little later ... 

24. Limestone head of a female statuette belonging to the best 

period of Sumerian art ... 

25. One of a series of copper female foundation-figures with 

supporting rings ... 
26-27. Heads of a bull and goat, cast in copper and inlaid with mother- 
of-pearl, lapis-lazuli, etc. 

28. Stamped terra-cotta figure of a bearded god, wearing a horned 

headdress ... 

29. Scheme of decoration from a libation-vase of Gudea, made of 

dark green steatite and originally inlaid with shell ... 

30. Convex panel of shell from the side of a cup, engraved with a 

scene representing a lion attacking a bull 
31-33. Fragments of shell engraved with animal forms, which illustrate 
the growth of a naturalistic treatment in Sumerian design ... 























34-37. Panels of mother-of-pearl engraved with Sumerian designs^ 

which were employed for inlaying the handles of daggers ... 82 

38. Archaic plaque from Tcllo, engraved in low relief with a scene 

of adoration ... ... ... ... •■• ••• ••• ^^ 

39. Figure of Lupad, a high official of the city of Umma OG 

40. Statue of Esar, King of Adab 97 

41. Emblems of Lagash and of the god Ningirsu 98 

42. Mace-head dedicated to Ningirsu by Mesilim, King of Kish ... 99 

43. Early Sumerian figure of a woman, showing the Sumerian dress 

and the method of doing the hair ... ... ... ... 112 

44. Plaque of Ur-Nina, King of Lagash ... ... ... ... 113 

45. Portion of a plaque of Ur-Nina, sculptured with representations 

of his sons and the high officials of his court ... ... ... 114 

46. Part of the Stele of the Vultures representing Ningirsu clubbing 

the enemies of Lagash in his net ... ... ... ... 131 

47. Part of the Stele of the Vultures sculptured with a sacrificial 

scene which took place at tlie burial of the dead after battle 140 

48. Part of the Stele of the Vultures repi-esenting Eannatum 

deciding the fate of prisoners taken in battle ... ... 141 

49-51. Details from the engravings upon Euteinena's silver vase ... 167 
62-53. Seal-impression of Lugal-anda, patesi of Lagash, with recon- 
struction of the cylinder-seal ... ... ... ... ... 174 

64-55. A second seal-impression of Lugal-anda, with reconstruction of 

the cylinder ... 175 

66. White marble vase engraved with the name and title of 

Urumush, King of Kish 204 

67. Alabaster statue of Manishtusu, King of Kish 213 

68. Copper head of a colossal votive lance engraved with the name 

and title of an early king of Kish 229 

69. Stele of Naram-Sin, King of Akkad, from Pir Hussein ... 245 

60. Portion of a Stele of Victory of a king of Akkad, sculptured in 

relief with battle-scenes ; from Tello 248 

61. Other face of Fig. 60 249 

02-63. Copper figures of bulls surmounting cones, which were employed 

as votive offerings in the reigns of Gudea and Dungi ... 256 

64-65. Tablets with architect's rule and stilus from the statues B and 

FofGudea 265 

66. Figure of a god seated upon a throne, who may probably be 

identified with Ningirsu ... ... 207 

67. Mace-head of breccia from a mountain near the " Upper Sea " 

or Mediterranean, dedicated to Ningirsu by Gudea ... ... 271 

68. Designs on painted potsherds of the Neolithic period (Culture I.) 

from the Nortli Kurgan at Anau ... ... 355 

69. Designs on painted potsherds of the Aeneolitliic i)crioil 

(Culture II.) from the North Kurgan at Anau 356 



I. Plan of Tello, after De Sarzec 

II. Plan of Jokha^ after Andrae 

III. Plan of Fara^ after Andrae and Noeldeke 

IV. Plan of Abu Hatabj after Andrae and Noeldeke 
V. Plan of Warka, after Loftus 

VI. Plan of Mukayyarj after Taylor 

VII. Plan of Abu Shahrain, after Taylor 

VIII. Early Babylonian plan of tlie temple of Enlil at Nippur and its 
enclosure ; cf. Fislier^ "Excavations at Nippur/' I., pi. 1 

IX. Plan of the Inner City at Nippur^ after Fislier, " Excavations 

at Nippur^" I., p. 10 

X. Plan of the store-house of Ur-Niua at Tello, after De Sarzec 

XI. Plan of early buildinjj at Tello, after De Sarzec ... 

XII. Map of Babylonia^ showing' the sites of early cities. Inset : Map 

of Sumer and Akkad in the earliest historical period 

Facing page 










THE study of origins may undoubtedly be regarded 
as the most striking characteristic of recent 
archaeological research. There is a peculiar 
fascination in trackuig any highly developed civilization 
to its source, and m watching its growth from the rude 
and tentative efforts of a primitive people to the more 
elaborate achievements of a later day. And it is owing 
to recent excavation that we are now in a position to 
elucidate the early history of the three principal civiliza- 
tions of the ancient world. The origins of Greek 
civilization may now be traced beyond the JNIycenean 
epoch, through the different stages of Aegean culture 
back into the Neolithic age. In Egypt, excavations 
have not only yielded remains of the early dynastic 
kings who lived before the pyramid-builders, but they 
have revealed the existence of Neolithic Egyptians 
dating from a period long anterior to the earliest written 
records that have been recovered. Finally, excavations 
in Babylonia have enabled us to trace the civihzation of 
Assyria and Babylon back to an earlier and more primi- 
tive race, which in the remote past occupied the lower 
plains of the Tigris and Euphrates ; while the more 
recent digging in Persia and Turkestan has thrown 
light upon other primitive inhabitants of Western 
Asia, and has raised problems with regard to their 
cultural connections with the West which were un- 
dreamed of a few years ago. 

It will thus be noted that recent excavation and 

1 B 


research have fiiniishctl the urehueolc)<^nst with material 
by means of wliieli he may traee back tlie history of 
culture to the Xeohtliic period, botli in the re<^^ion of 
the JNlediterranean and along the valley of the Nile. 
That the same achievement cannot be placed to the 
credit of the excavator of Babylonian sites is not 
entirely due to defects in the scope or method of his 
work, but may largely be traced to the character of the 
country in which the exca\ ations have been carried out. 
babylonia is an alluvial country, subject to constant 
inundation, and the remahis and settlements of the 
Neolithic period were doubtless in many places swept 
away, and all trace of them destroyed by natural 
causes. AVith the advent of the Sumerians began the 
practice of building cities upon artilieial mounds, 
which preserved the structure of the buildings against 
flood, and rendered them easier of defence against 
a foe. It is through excavation in these mounds that 
the earliest remains of the Sumerians have been re- 
covered ; but the still earlier traces of Neolithic 
times, which at some period may have existed on those 
very sites, must often have been removed by flood 
before the mounds were built. The Neolithic and pre- 
historic remains discovered during the French excava- 
tions in the graves of JNIussian and at Susa, and by the 
Pumpelly expedition in the two Kurgans near Anau, 
do not find theii' equivalents in the mounds of 
Babylonia so far as these have yet been examined. 

In this respect the climate and soil of Babylonia 
present a striking contrast to those of ancient Egypt. 
In the latter country the shallow graves of Neolithic 
man, covered by but a few inches of soil, have remained 
intact and undisturbed at the foot of the desert hills ; 
while in the upper plateaus along the Nile valley the 
flints of Palaeolithic man have lain upon the surface of 
the sand from I'alaeolithic times until the present day. 
But what has happened in so rainless a country as 
Egypt could never have taken place in Mesopotamia. 
It is true that a few palaeoliths have been found on 
the surface of the Syrian desert, but in the alluvial 
plains of Southern Chaldaea, as in the Egyptian 
Delta itself, few certain traces of prehistoric man have 


been forthcoming. Even in the early mat-burials and 
sarcophagi at Fara numerous copper objects ^ and some 
cylinder-seals have been found, while other cylinders, 
sealings, and even inscribed tablets, discovered in the 
same and neighbouring strata, prove that their owners 
were of the same race as the Sumerians of history, 
though probably of a rather earlier date. 

Although the earliest Sumerian settlements in 
Southern Babylonia are to be set back in a compara- 
tively remote period, the race by which they were 
founded appears at that time to have already attained 
to a high level of culture. We find them building 
houses for themselves and temples for their gods of 
burnt and unburnt brick. They are rich in sheep and 
cattle, and they have increased the natural fertility of 
their country by means of a regular system of canals 
and irrigation-channels. It is true that at this time 
their sculpture shared the rude character of their pottery, 
but their main achievement, the invention of a system 
of writing by means of lines and wedges, is in itself 
sufficient indication of their comparatively advanced 
state of civilization. Derived originally from picture- 
characters, the signs themselves, even in the earliest 
and most primitive inscriptions as yet recovered, have 
already lost to a great extent their pictorial character, 
while we find them employed not only as ideograms 
to express ideas, but also phonetically for syllables. 
The use of this complicated system of writing by the 
early Sumerians presupposes an extremely long period 
of previous development. This may well have taken 
place in their original home, before they entered the 
Babylonian plain. In any case, we must set back in 
the remote past the beginnings of this ancient people, 
and we may probably picture their first settlement in 
the neighbourhood of the Persian Gulf some centuries 
before the period to whicli we may assign the earliest of 
their remains that have actually come down to us. 

In view of the important rule played by this early 
race in the history and development of civilization in 
Western Asia, it is of interest to recall the fact that not 

' For a fliscussion of the conflicting evidence with regard to the occurreuce 
of bronze at this period^ see below, pj^. 72 ff. 



many years atro tlic very existence of the Sinnerians 
was disputed l)y a large body of those who occupied 
themselves with the study of the history and languages 
of Babylonia. What was known as "the Sumerian 
controversy " engaged the attention of writers on these 
subjects, and divided them into two opposing schools. 
At that time not many actual remains of the Sumerians 
themselves had been recovered, and the arguments in 
favour of the existence of an early non-Semitic race in 
Babylonia were in the main drawn Irom a number of 
Smnerian texts and compositions which had been found 
in the palace of the ^Vssyrian king, Ashur-bani-pal, at 
Nineveh. A considerable number of the tablets re- 
covered from the royal library were inscribed with a 
series of compositions, -svi-itten, it is true, in the cunei- 
form script, but not in the Semitic language of the 
Assyrians and Babylonians. To many of these compo- 
sitions Assyrian translations had been added by the 
scribes who drew them up, and upon other tablets were 
found lists of the words employed in the compositions, 
together with their Assyrian equivalents. The late Sir 
Henry Rawlinson rightly concluded that these strange 
texts were written in the language of some race who 
had inhabited Babylonia before the Semites, while he 
explahied the lists of words as early dictionaries compiled 
by the Assyrian scribes to help them in their studies 
of this ancient tongue. The early race he christened 
*' the Akkadians," and although we now know that this 
name would more correctly describe the early Semitic 
immigrants who occupied Northern Babylonia, in 
all other respects his inference was justified. He 
correctly assigned the non-Semitic compositions that 
had been recovered to the early non-Semitic popula- 
tion of Ijabylonia, who are now known by the name 
of the Sumerians. 

Sir Henry Rawlinson's view was shared by M. 
Oppert, Professor Schrader, Professor Sayce, and 
many others, and, in fact, it held the field until a 
tlieory was propounded by IM. Halevy to the effect that 
Sumerian was not a language in the legitimate sense 
of the term, 'i'hc contention of M. Halevy was that 
the Sumerian compositions were not written in the 


language of an earlier race, but represented a cabalist^^ 
method of writing, in^•ented and employed by the Baby- 
lonian priesthood. In his opinion the texts were 
Semitic compositions, though Avritten according to a 
secret system or code, and they could only have been 
read by a priest who had the key and had studied the 
jealously guarded formulae. On this hypothesis it fol- 
lowed that the Babylonians and Assyrians were never 
preceded by a non-Semitic race in Babylonia, and all 
Babylonian civilization was consequently to be traced 
to a Semitic origin. The attractions which such a view 
would have for those mterested in ascribing; so crreat 
an achievement to a Semitic source are ob^•ious, and, 
in spite of its general improbabihty, M. Halevy won 
o\er many converts to his theory, among others Pro- 
fessor Delitzsch and a considerable number of the 
younger school of German critics. 

It may be noted that the principal support for the 
theory was derived from an examination of the phonetic 
values of the Sumerian signs. Many of these, it was 
correctly pointed out, were obviously derived from 
Semitic equivalents, and ^I. Halevy and his followers 
forthwith inferred that the whole language was an 
artificial invention of the Babylonian priests. Why the 
priests should have taken the trouble to invent so com- 
plicated a method of writing was not clear, and no 
adequate reason could be assigned for such a course. 
On the contrary, it was shown that the subject-matter 
of the Sumerian compositions was not of a nature to 
justify or suggest the necessity of recording tliem by 
means of a secret method of writing. A study of the 
Sumerian texts with the help of the Assyrian transla- 
tions made it obvious that they merely consisted of 
incantations, hymns, and prayers, precisely similar to 
other compositions written in the common tongue of 
the Babylonians and Assyrians, and thus capable of 
being read and understood by any scribe acquainted 
with the ordhiary Assyrian or Babylonian character. 

INI. Halevy 's theory appeared still less probable when 
appUed to such of the early Sumerian texts as had 
been recovered at that time by Loftus and Taylor in 
Southern Babylonia. For these were shown to be 


short biiilding-insrriptions, votive texts, and foundation- 
records, and, as they Avere obviously intended to record 
and connneniorate for future afj^cs tlie events to ^vhich 
tlicv referred, it was unlikely tliat they should have been 
drawn up in a crypto^rnphic style of writing which 
would have been undecipherable without a key. Yet 
the fact that very few Sumerian documents of the early 
period had been found, wliile the great majority of the 
texts recovered were known only from tablets of the 
seventh centmy n.c, rendered it possible for the upholders 
of the pan-Semitic theory to make out a case. In fact, 
it was not until the renewal of excavations in Babylonia 
that fresh e\idence was obtained M'hich put an end 
to the Sumerian controversy, and settled the problem 
once for all in accordance with the view of Sir Henry 
Kawlinson and of the more conservative "WTiters.^ 

That Babylonian civilization and culture originated 
with the Sumerians is no longer in dispute ; the point 
upon which difference of opinion now centres concerns 
the period at which Sumerians and Semites first came 
into contact. But before we embark on the discussion 
of this problem, it will be well to give some account of 
tlie physical conditions of the lands which invited the 
immigration of these early races and formed the theatre 
of their subsequent history. The lands of Sumer and 
Akkad were situated in the lower valley of the 
Euphrates and the Tigris, and corresponded approxi- 
mately to the coinitry known by classical writers as 
Babylonia. On the west and south their boundaries 
are definitely marked by the Arabian desert and the 
Persian Gulf which, in the earliest period of Sumerian 
history, extended as far northward as the neighbour- 
hood of the city of Eridu. On the east it is probable 
that the Tigris originally formed their natural boundary, 
but this was a direction in which expansion was possible, 
and their early conflicts with Elam were doubtless 
provoked by attempts to gain possession of the districts 

' 'ilie cniitroveisy has now an historical rather than a practical importance. 
Its earlier history is admirably summarized by AVeissbach in " Die sumerische 
Frape," Leipzig', 181J8 ; cf. also Fossey, "iVIanucl d'Assyriologie,'' tome 1. 
(Iil04), pp. 2(;9 ff. M. Halt'vy himself continues courageously to defend his 
position in the pages of the " Revue St^mitique," but his followers have 
deserted him. 



to the east of the river. The frontier in this direction 
undoubtedly underwent many fluctuations under the 
rule of the early city-states, but in the later periods, 
apart from the conquest of Elam, the true area of 
Sumerian and Semitic authority may be regarded as 
extending to the lower slopes of the Elamite hills. In 
the north a political division appears to have corre- 
sponded then, as in later times, to the difference in 
geological structure. A line drawn from a point a 
little below Samarra on the Tigris before its junction 
with the Adhem to Hit on the Euphrates marks the 
division between the slightly elevated and undulating 
plain and the dead level of the alluvium, and this may 
be regarded as representing the true boundary of Akkad 
on the north. The area thus occupied by the two 
countries was of no very great extent, and it was even 
less than would appear from a modern map of the 
Tigris and Euphrates valley. For not only was the 
head of the Persian Gulf some hundred and twenty, or 
hundred and thirty, miles distant from the present 
coast-line, but the ancient course of the Euphrates 
below Babylon lay considerably to the east of its 
modern bed. 

In general character the lands of Sumer and Akkad 
consist of a flat alluvial plain, and form a contrast to 
the northern half of the Tigris and Euphrates valley, 
known to the Greeks as Mesopotamia and Assyria. 
These latter regions, both m elevation and geological 
structure, resemble the Syro-Arabian desert, and it is 
only in the neighbourhood of the two great streams 
and their tributaries that cultivation can be carried out 
on any extensive scale. Here the country at a little 
distance from the rivers becomes a stony plain, serving 
only as pasture -land when covered with vegetation 
after the rains of winter and the early spring. In 
Sumer and Akkad, on the other hand, the rivers play 
a far more important part. The larger portion of the 
country itself is directly due to their action, having 
been formed by the deposit which they have carried 
down into the waters of the Gulf. Through this 
alluvial plain of their own formation the rivers take 
a w^inding course, constantly changing their direction 


in consequence of the silting up of tlieir beds and 
the fnlliii!'- in ol'tlie bajiks duiijiix the annual floods. 

Of Uic two rivers tiie Tigris, oMing to its higher 
and stronger banks, has undergone less change than the 
Euphrates. It is true that during the Middle Ages its 
present channel below Kut el-'i\inara was entirely 
disused, its waters flowing by the Shatt el-Hai into 
the Great Swamp which extended from Kufa on the 
Euphrates to the neighbourhood of Kurna, covering an 
area fifty miles across and nearly two hundred miles in 
length.' But in the Sassanian period the Great Swamp, 
the formation of which was due to neglect of the 
system of irrigation under the early caliphs, did not 
exist, and the ri\'cr followed its present channel.'- It is 
thus probable that during the earlier periods of Baby- 
lonian history the main body of water passed this way 
mto the Gulf, but the Shatt el-Hai may have repre- 
sented a second and less important branch of the 

The change in the course of the Euphrates has been 
fjir more marked, the jjosition of its original bed being 
indicated by the mounds covering the sites of early 
cities, M'hich extend through the country along the 
practically dry beds of the Shatt en-Nil and the Shatt 
el-Kar, considerably to the east of its present channel. 
The mounds of Abu Habba, Tell Ibrrdiim, El-Ohemir 
and Niffer, marking the sites of the important cities 

' The origin of tlie Great Swamp, or Swamps, called by Arab geographers 
al-Batiha, or in* the plural al-BaU'iyih, is traced by Biladhuri to the reign of 
tlie Persian king Kubadii I., towards tlio end of the filtli century b.c. Ihn 
Serapion applies the name in the singular to four great stretches of water 
{llawm), connected by channels through the reeds, wliicli began at El-Katr, 
near the junction of the Sliatt el-IIai with the present bed of the Euphrates. 
But from this point as far nortliwards as Nifier and Kiifa the wateis of tiie 
Kupliratcs lost themselves in reed-beds and marshes; cf. G. le Strange, 
"Journ. Koy. Asiat. Soc," 1D05, p. li;)7 f., and ''Lands of the Eastern 
Caliphate," p. 20 f. 

^ Accordnig to Ibn Ilusta ((juoted by Le Strange, "Journ. Roy. Asiat. 
See," ]!»Uo, p. .301), in Sassanian times, and before the bursting of the dykes 
which led to the formation of the swamps, the 'i'igris followed the same 
eastern channel in whicli it flows at the present time ; this account is 
confirmed by Yakut. 

^ See tlie folding map at the end of tlie volume. The original courses of 
the rivers in the small inset map of Babylonia during the earliest historical 
periods agree in tlie main witli I'isher's reconstruction published in " Excava- 
tions at Nippur," Pt. I., p. 3, Fig. 2. Eor points on which uncertainty still 
exists, see below, p. 10 f. 


of Sippar, Ciitba, Kish ' and Nippur, all lie to the east 
of the river, the last two on the ancient bed of the 
Shatt en-]\il. Similarly, the course of the Shatt 
el-Kar, which formed an extension of the Shatt 
en-Nil below Suk el-'Afej passes the mounds of Ahu 
Hatab (Kisurra), Ffira (Shuruppak) and Hammam. 
Warka (Erech) stands on a further continuation of the 
Shatt en-Xil," while still more to the eastward are the 
mounds of Bismaya and Jokha, representing the cities 
of Adab and Umma.^ Senkera, the site of Larsa, also 
lies considerably to the east of the present stream, and 
the only city besides Babylon which now stands com- 
paratively near the present bed of the Euphrates is Ur. 
The positions of the ancient cities would alone be 
sufficient proof that, since the early periods of Baby- 
lonian history, the Euphrates luis considerably changed 
its course. 

Abundant evidence that this was the case is furnished 
by the contemporary inscriptions that have been re- 
covered. The very name of the Euphrates was expressed 
by an ideogram signifying " the River of Sippar," from 
which we may infer tliat Sippar originally stood upon 
its banks. A Babylonian contract of the period of the 
First Dynasty is dated in the year in which Samsu-iluna 
constructed the wall of Kish " on the bank of the 
Euphrates," * proving that either the main stream from 
Sippar, or a branch from Babylon, flowed by El-Oliemir. 
Still further south the river at Nippur, marked as at 
El-Ohemir by the dry bed of the Shatt en-Nil, is termed 
" the Euphrates of Nippur," or simply " the Euphrates " 
on contract-tablets found upon the site.^ IMoreover, 
the city of Shurippak or Shuruppak, the native town of 
Ut-napishtim, is deseriljed by him in the Gilgamesh 
epic as lying " on the bank of the Euphrates " ; and 
Hammurabi, in one of his letters to Sin-idinnam, bids 

» See below, p. ."^S f. 

^ See the plan of Warka by Loftus, reproduced on p. 33. It will l.e noted 
that he marks the ancient bed of the Shatt en-Nil as skirting the city on the 

' See below^ p. 21 f. 

* Cf. Thureau-Uanain, ''Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1909, col. 205 f. 

^ See Clay and Hilprecht, " Murashii Sons" (Artaxerxes I.), p. 7^, and 
Clay, " Murashu Sons" (Darius II.), p. 70; cf. also Hommel, " Gruiidriss 
der Geographie und Geschichte des alien Orients," p. 264. 


him clear out the stream of tlie Euphrates " from Earsa 
as far as Mr/"^ These references in the early texts 
cover practically tlie whole course of the ancient bed of 
the P^uphrates, and leave but a few points open to 

In tlie norlli it is clear tliat at an early period a 
second brancii broke away from the Euphrates at a 
point about half-way between Sippar and the modern 
town of ralnja, and, after flowing along the present 
bed of the river as far as Babylon, rejoined the main 
stream of the Euphrates either at, or more probably 
below, the city of Kish. It was the extension of these 
western channels which afterwards drained the earlier 
bed, and we may conjectm'e that its waters were 
di\erted back to tiie Euphrates at this early period by 
artificial means.^ The tendency of the river was always 
to break away westward, and the latest branch of the 
stream, still further to the west, left the river above 
Babylon at JNlusayyib. The fact that Birs, the site of 
Borsippa, stands upon its upper course, suggests an 
early date for its origin, but it is quite possible that the 
first city on this site, in view of its proximity to 
Babylon, obtained its water-supply by means of a 
system of canals. However this may be, the present 
course of this most western branch is marked by the 
Nahr Hindiya, the Bahr Nejef, and the Shatt 'Ateshan, 
which rejoins the Euphrates after passing Samawa. In 
the iSIiddle Ages the Great Swamps started at Kufa, and 
it is possible that even in earlier times, during periods of 
inundation, some of the surplus water from the river 
may have emptied itself into swamps or marshy land 
below Borsippa, 

The exact course of the Euphrates south of Nippur 
during the earliest periods is still a matter for con- 
jecture, and it is quite possible that its waters reached 
the l*ersian Gulf through two, if not three, mouths. It 
is certain that the main stream passed the cities of 
Kisurra, Shuru])pak, and Erech, and eventually reached 

' Cf. King, " Letters of Hammurabi," III., p. 18 f. 

^ 'Hie Yusufiya Canal, running from Diuaniya to the Shatt el-Kar, was 
jirohahly the result of a later eflort to divert some of the water back to the 
ohl bed. 


the Gulf below Ur. Whether after leaving Erech it 
turned eastward to Larsa, and so south waixl to Ur, or 
whether it flowed from Erech direct to Ur, and T^arsa 
lay upon anotlier branch, is not yet settled, though the 
reference in Hammura})i's letter may be cited in favoiu- 
of the former view. Another point of uncertainty 
concerns the relation of A dab and Umma to the stream. 
The mounds of Bismaya and Joklia, wliicli mark their 
sites, lie to the east, ofi' tlie line of tlie Shatt el-Kar, and 
it is quite possible that they were built upon an eastern 
branch of the river which may have joined the Shatt 
el-Hai above Lagash, and so liave mingled with the 
waters of the Tigris before reaching the Gulf.^ 

In spite of these points of uncertainty, it will be 
noted that every city of Sumer and Akkad, the site of 
which has been referred to, was situated on the 
Euphrates or one of its brandies, not upon tlie Tigris, 
and the only exception to this rule appears to have 
been Opis, the most northern city of Akkad. The 
preference for the Euphrates may be explained by the 
fact that the Tigris is swift and its banks are high, and 
it thus offers far less facilities for irrigation. The 
Euphrates with its lower banks tends during the time 
of high water to spread itself over the surrounding 
country, which doubtless suggested to the earliest in- 
habitants the project of regulating and utilizing the 
supply of water by means of reservoirs and canals. 
Another reason for the preference may be traced to the 
slower fall of the water in the Euphrates during the 
summer months. With the meltinp; of the snow in 
the mountain ranges of the Taurus and Niphates during 
the early spring, the first flood-water is carried down 
by the swift stream of the Tigris, which generally begins 
to rise in March, and, after reaching its highest level in 
the early part of ISIay, falls swiftly and returns to its 
summer level by the middle of June. The Euphrates, 
on the other hand, rises about a fortnight later, and 
continues at a high level for a much longer period. 

' Andrae visited and surveyed the districts around Fara and Abu Hatab 
in December^ 1902. In his map he marks traces of a channel, the Shatt el- 
Farakhna, which, leaving the main channel at Shekh liedr, heads in the 
direction of Bismaya (see " Mitteilungen der Doutschen Orient-Gesellschaft," 
No. 16, pp. 16 flF.).' 


Even in the middle of July there is a eonsiderable body 
of M'ater in the river, and it is not until September that 
its lowest level is renehed. On both streams irrigation- 
maehines were doubtless employed, as they are at the 
j)resent day,^ but in the Euphrates they were only 
necessary when the water in the river had fallen below 
tiie level of the canals. 

Between the lands of Sumer and Akkad there was 
no natural division such as marks them off from the 
regions of Assyria and JNIesopotamia in the noi'th. While 
the north-eastern half of the country bore the name of 
Akkad, and the south-eastern portion at the head of the 
]*ersian Gulf was known as Sumer, the same alluvial 
plain stretches southward from one to the other v/ith- 
out any change in its general character. Thus some 
difference of opinion has previously existed, as to the 
precise boinidary which separated the two lands, and 
additional confusion has been introduced by the rather 
vague use of the name Akkad during the later Assyrian 
and Neo-Babylonian periods. Thus Ashur-bani-pal, 
when referring to the capture of Nana's statue by the 
Elamites, puts E-anna, the temple of Nana in Erech, 
among the temples of the land of Akkad, a statement 
which has led to the view that Akkad extended as far 
south as Erech.^ Ikit it has been pointed out that on 
similar evidence furnished by an Assyrian letter, it 
would be possible to regard Eridu, the most southern 
Sumerian city as in Akkad, not in Sumer.^ The ex- 
planation is to be found in the fact that by the Assyrians, 
whose southern border marched with Akkad, the latter 
name was often used loosely for the whole of Babylonia. 
Such references should not therefore be employed for 
determining the original limits of the two countries, and 
it is necessary to rely only upon information supplied by 
texts of a period earlier tlian that in which the original 
distinction between the two names had become blurred. 

From references to different cities in the early texts, it 
is possible to form from their context, a very fair idea of 
what the Sumerians thcmselv^es regarded as the limits 

> Vf. Kin'4 and Hall, " ICirvpt and \\'ostern Asia," pp. 292 ff. 

2 Cf. Delitzscli. " \\(. ha das I'aiadiis? " p. 200. 

» Cf. 'riiiireau-Dangin, " Journal asiatiqne/' I'.lOP,, p. 131, u. 2. 


of their own Ituid. For instance, from the Tello 
inscriptions there is no doubt that Lagash was in 
Sumer. Thus the god Ningirsu, when informing 
Gudea, patesi of I^agash, tliat prosperity shall follow 
the building of E-ninnu, promises that oil and wool 
shall be abundant in Sumer ; ' the temple itself, which 
was in Lagash, i^ recorded to have been built of bricks 
of Sumer ;^ and, after the building of the temple was 
finished, Gudca prays that the land may rest in security, 
and that Sumer may be at the head of the countries.^ 
Again, Lugal-zaggisi, who styles himself King of the 
Land, i.e. the land of Sumer,* mentions among cities 
subject to him, Erech, Ur, Larsa, and Umma,^ proving 
that they were regarded as Sumerian towns. The city 
of Kesh, whose goddess Ninkharsag is mentioned on the 
Stele of the Vultures, with the gods of Sumerian towns 
as guaranteeing a treaty between Lagash and Umma,® 
was probably in Sumer, and so, too, must have been 
Isin, which gave a line of rulers to Sumer and Akkad 
in succession to Ur ; about Eridu in the extreme south 
there could be no two opinions. On the other hand, 
in addition to the city of Agade or Akkad, Sippar, 
Kish, Opis, Cutlia, Babylon and Borsippa are certainly 
situated beyond the limits of Sumer and belong to the 
land of Akkad in the north. Between the two 
groups lay Nippur, rather nearer to the southern than 
to the northern cities, and occupying the unique 
position of a central shrine. There is little doubt that 
the town was originally regarded as within the limits of 
Sumer, but from its close association with any claimant 
to the hegemony, whether in Sumer or in Akkad, it 
acquired in course of time a certain intermediate posi- 
tion, on the boundary line, as it were, between the two 

Of the names Sumer and Akkad, it would seem that 
neither was in use in the earliest historical periods, 

' Cyl. A, Col. XI., 1. 16 f. ; see below. Chap. IX., p. 2G6. 

2 Ibid., Col. XXI , 1. 25. 

3 Cyl. B, Col. XXII., 1. 10 f. 
* See below, p. 14. 

'^ For this reading of Uie name of the city usually trauscribed as Gishkha 
or Gishukh, see below, p. 21, n. o. 
^ See below, Chap. V., p. 127 f. 


thou<^h the fonner was probably the older of the two. 
At a comparatively early date the southern district as 
a whole was reiened to simply as "the Land,"^ pai' 
excellence, ami it is probable tiiat the ideogram by which 
the name of Sumer Mas expressed, was originally used 
with a similar meaning.- The twin title, Sumer and 
^Vkkad, was first regularly employed as a designation 
for the whole country by tlie kings of Ur, who united 
the two lialves of the land into a single empire, and 
called themselves kings of Sumer and Akkad. The 
earlier Semitic kings of Agade or Akkad ^ expressed 
the extent of their empire by claiming to rule "the 
four quarters (of the world)," while the still earlier 
king Lugal-zaggisi, in virtue of his authority in Sumer, 

1 The word kalam, "the Land," is first found in a royal title upon frag- 
ments of early vases from Nippur which a certain " king of the land'' 
dedicated to Enlil in gratitude for his victories over Kish (see below, 
Chap. \'1I.). The word kur-kur, "countries/' in such a phrase as lugdl kur- 
kur-ge, " king of the countries," when applied to the god Enlil, designated 
the whole of the habitable world ; in a more restricted sense it was used for 
foreign countries, especially in the inscriptions of Gudea, in contradistinction 
to the Land of Sumer (cf. Thureau-Dangin, ''Zeits. fiir Assyr.,"XVL, p. 354, 
n. 3). 

- The ideogram Ki-en-gi, by which the name of Sumer, or more correctly 
Shumer, was expressed, already occurs in the texts of Eannatum, Lugal- 
zaggisi andEnshagkushanna (see Chaps. \. and VII.). It has generally been 
treated as an earlier proper name for the country, and read as Kengi or 
Kingi. But the occurrence of the word ki-en-gi-ra in a Sumerian hymn, 
where it is rendered in Semitic by mdtu, "land" (see Reisner, ''Sum.-13ab. 
Ilyranen," pi. 130 ff.), would seem to show that, like kalam, it was employed 
as a general designation for "the Land" (cf. Thureau-Dangin, "Die 
sumerischen und akkadischeu Kunigsinschriften," p. 152, n.f.). llie form 
ki-engi-ra is also met with in the inscriptions of Gudea (see Hommel, 
" Grundriss," p. 242, n. 4, and Thureau-Dangin, op. cit., pp. 100, 112, 140), 
and it has been suggested that the final syllable sliould be treated as a 
phonetic complement and the word rendered as shiimer-ra (cf. Hrozny, 
" Ninib und Sumer," iii tlie "Rev. Se'mit.," July, 1908, E.xtrait, p. 15). Accord- 
ing to this view the word nhumcr, with tlie original meaning of " land," was 
afterwards employed as a proper name for the country. The earliest occur- 
rence of Shumeru, the Semitic form of the name, is in an early Semitic 
legend in the British Museum, which refers to " the spoil of tlie Sunierians " 
(see King, " Cun. Texts," Pt. V., pi. 1 f., and cf. ^Villckler, "Orient. Lit- 
Zeit.," 1!J07, col. 34G, Ungnad, op. cit., 1908, col. 67, and Hrozny, " Rev. 
S^mit.," 1!)08, p. 350). 

^ Akkad, or AkkadCi, was the Semitic pronunciation of Agade, the older 
name of tlie town ; a similar sharpening of sound occurs in Makkan, the 
Semitic pronunciation of Magan (cf. Ungnad, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1908, 
coL 02, n. 4). The employment of the name of Akkad for the whole of the 
northern half of the country probably dates from a period subsequent to the 
increase of the city's power under Shar-Gani sliarri and Naram-Sin (see 
t hap. \TII.) ; on the employment of the name for the Semitic speech of the 
north, see below, p 52. The origin of the name Ki-uri, or Ki-urra, 
employed in Sumerian as the equivalent of the name of Akkad, is obscure. 


adopted the title " King of the I^and." In the time of 
the early city-states, before the period of Eannatum, 
no general title for the whole of Sinner or of ^Vkkad is 
met with in the inscriptions that have been recovered. 
Each city with its surrounding territory formed a com- 
pact state in itself, and fought with its neighbours for 
local power and precedence. At this time the names 
of the cities occur by themselves in the titles of their 
rulers, and it was only after several of them had been 
welded into a single state that the need was felt for a 
more general name or designation. Thus, to sj)eak of 
Akkad, and even perhaps of Sumer, in the earliest 
period, is to be guilty of an anachronism, but it is a 
pardonable one. The names may be employed as 
convenient geographical terms, as, for instance, when 
referring to the country as a whole, we speak of 
Babylonia during all periods of its history. 



THE excavations which have been conducted on 
the sites of early Babylonian cities since the 
middle of last century have furnished material 
for the reconstruction of their history, but during 
different periods and for different districts it varies 
considerably in value and amount. AVhile little is 
known of the earlier settlements in Akkad, and the 
very sites of two of its most famous cities have not yet 
been identified, our knowledge of Sumerian history and 
topography is relatively more complete. Here the 
cities, as represented by the mounds of earth and debris 
wliich now cover them, fall naturally into two groups. 
Tlie one consists of those cities which continued in 
existence during the later periods of Babylonian history. 
In their case the earliest Sumerian remains have been 
considerably disturbed by later builders, and are now 
buried deep beneath tlie accumulations of successive 
ages. Their excavation is consequently a task of con- 
siderable difficulty, and, even when the lowest strata 
are reached, the interpretation of the evidence is often 
doubtful. The other group comprises towns which 
were occupied mainly by the Sumerians, and, after 
being destroyed at an early date, were rarely, or never, 
reoccupied by tlie later inhabitants of tlie country. 
Tlie mounds of tliis dcscri})tion, so far as tliey liave 
been examined, liave naturally yielded fuller informa- 
tion, and they may therefore be taken first in the 
following description of the early sites. 

The greater j^art of our knowledge of early Sumerian 
history has been derived from the wonderfully successful 



series of excavations carried out by the late INI. de 
Sarzec at Tello/ between 1877 and 1900, and continued 
for some months in 1903 by Captain (now Com- 
mandant) Gaston Cros. These mounds mark the site 
of tlie city of Shirpurla or Lagash, and he a few miles 
to the north-east of tlie modern village of Shatra, to 
the east of the Shatt el-IIai, and about an liour's ride 
from the present course of the stream. It is evident, 
howe\cr, that the city was built upon the stream, which 
at this point may originally have formed a branch of 
the Euphrates,^ for there are traces of a dry channel 
upon its western side. 

The name of the city is expressed by the signs shir- 
pur-la {-ki), which are rendered in a bilingual incanta- 
tion-text as Lagash.^ Hitherto it has been generally 
held that Shirpurla represented the Sumerian name of 
the city, which was known to the later Semitic inhabitants 
as Lagash, in much the same way as Akkad was the 
Semitic name for Agade, though in the latter case the 
original name was taken over. But the prolonged 
excavations carried out in the mounds of Tello have 
ftiiled to bring to light any Babylonian remains later 
than the period of the kings of Larsa who were con- 
temporaneous ^dth the First Dynasty of Babylon. At 
that time the city appears to have been destroyed, and to 
have lain deserted and forgotten imtil it was once more 
inhabited in the second century B.C. Thus it is difficult 
to find a reason for a second name. We may therefore 

* In point of time, the work of Loftus and Taylor (see below^ pp. 32 ff.) 
preceded that of De Sarzec, but the results obtained were necessarily less 
complete. It would be out of place in the present volume to give any account 
of excavations in Assyria, as they have only an indirect bearing on the period 
here treated. For a chronological sketch of tlie early travellers and excava- 
tors, see Rogers, " History of Babylonia and Assyria," vol. i. pp. 100 if., who 
also gives a detailed account of the decipherment of the cuneiform inscrip- 
tions ; cf. also Fossey, "Manuel," I., pp. 6 ff. For a similar chronological 
treatment, but from the archaeological side, see the sections ivith whicli 
Hilprecht prefaces his account of the Nippur excavations in " Kxplorations 
in Bible J.ands," pp. 7 ff. 

- See above, p. 11. 

3 Cf. " Cun. Texts in the Brit. Mas.," Pt. XVI., pi. .3G, 1. 4 f. ; as written 
here the name might also be read Lagarum or Lagadil. That Lagash is the 
correct reading is proved by the fragment of a duplicate text published in 
Reisner, "Sum. -Bab. Hymnen," pi. 12G, No. 81, where the final character of 
the name is unmistakably written as ash ; cf. Meissner, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 
1907, col. 385. 



assume that the place was called Lagash by the 
Sumerians, and that the signs which can be read as 
Shirpurla represent a traditional ideographic way of 
writing the name amono' the Sumerians themselves. 
There is no diihculty in supposing that the city's name 
and the way of writing it were preserved in Babylonian 
literature, although its site liad been forgotten. 

The group of mounds and hillocks which mark the 
site of the ancient city and its suburbs form a rough 
oval, running north and south, and measuring about 
two and a half miles long and one and a quarter broad. 
During the early spring the limits of the city are clearly 
visible, for its ruins stand out as a yellow spot in the 
midst of the light green vegetation which covers the 
surrounding plain. The grouping of the principal 
mounds may be seen in the accompanying plan, in 
which each contour-line represents an increase of one 
metre in height above the desert level. The three 
principal moinids in the centre of the oval, marked on 
the plan by the letters A, K, and V,^ are those in which 
the most important discoveries have been made. The 
mound A, which rises steeply towards tlie north-west 
end of the oval, is known as the Palace Tell, since 
here was uncovered a great Parthian palace, ereeted 
immediately over a building of Gudea, whose bricks 
were partly reused and partly imitated. In conse- 
quence of this it was at first believed to be a palace of 
Gudea himself, an error that was corrected on the 
discovery that some of the later bricks bore the name 
of Hadadnadinakhe in Aramean and Greek characters, 
proving that the building belonged to the Seleucid era, 
and was probably not earher than about 130 B.C. Coins 
were also foimd in the palace with Greek inscriptions 
of kings of the little independent province or kingdom 
of Kharakene, which was foimded about IGO B.C. at the 
mouth of the Shatt el-' Arab. But worked into the 

' Separate niouiids in tlic jj:roup were rcferrod to hy ])e Sarzcc under the 
letters A-I', P', and V. For tlie actount of the difr^infrs and their results, 
see E. de Sarzec and Loon Heuzey, " Decouvertes en Chaldee '' (" Description 
des fouilles/' ]»y Ue Sarzec ; " Description des monuments/' hy Heuzey ; 
" Partie (•])if,'-raj)lii(|ue/' hy Aniiaud and 'J'liureau-Dan^nn), Paris, 1884-ltl0(i; 
see also Heuzey, " Uuq Villa royale chaldcenne," and " llevue d'Assyriologie," 



structure of this late palace were the remains of Gudea's 
building, which formed part of E-ninnu, the temple of 
the city-god of Lagash. Of Gudea's structure a gate- 
way and part of a tower are the portions that are best 

preserved/ while under the south-east corner of the 
palace was a wall of the rather earlier ruler Ur-Bau.^ 

1 The plate ojjposite p. 20 illustrates the way in which Gudea's gateway 
has been worked into the structure of the Parthian Palace. The slight difler- 
ence in the ground-level of tlic two buildings is also clearly shown. 

^ See the plate opposite p. 2G. 


In tlie lower strata no other earlier remains were 
broiio^ht to light, and it is possible that the site of the 
temple was changed or enlarged at this j)criod, and that 
in earlier times it stood nearer the mound K, where the 
oldest buildings in Tello have been found. Here was a 
storehouse of Ur-Nina/ a very early patesi of the city 
and the foimder of its most powerful dynasty, and in 
its immediate neiglibourhood were recovered the most 
important monuments and inscriptions of the earlier 
period. Beneath Ur-Nina's storehouse was a still 
earlier building,^ and at the same deep level above the 
virgin soil were found some of the earliest examples of 
Sumerian sculpture that have yet been recovered. In 
the mound V, christened the " Tell of the 'J'ablets," 
were large collections of temple-documents and tablets 
of accounts, the majority of them dating from the 
period of the Dynasty of Ur. 

The monuments and inscriptions from Tello have 
furnished us with material for reconstructing the 
history of the city with but few gaps from the earliest 
age until the time when the Dynasty of Isin succeeded 
that of Ur in the rule of Sumer and Akkad. To the 
destruction of the city during the period of the First 
Dynasty of Babylon and its subsequent isolation we 
owe the wealth of early records and archaeological 
remains which have come down to us, for its soil has 
escaped disturbance at tlie hands of later builders except 
for a short interval in Hellenistic times. The fact that 
other cities in the neighbourhood, which shared a 
similar fate, have not yielded such striking results to the 
excavator, in itself bears testimony to the important 
position occupied l)y I^agash, not only as the seat of a 
long line of successful rulers, but as the most important 
centre of Sumerian culture and art. 

The mounds of Surghul and El-Hibba, lying to the 
north-east of Tello and about six miles from each other, 
which were excavated by Dr. Koldcwey in 1887, are 
instances in })oint. Both mounds, and particularly the 
former, contain numerous early graves beneath houses 

' From tlie nature of this building Ainiaud christened the mound the 
*''i'cll de la Mai><on de« rrnit.«." 

* A description of these buildings is given in Chap. I\'., [)p. !.tO ff. 









'M * • 




> 5 


i:-^ r: 's 

— X 


of iinburnt brick, such as have subsequently been found 
at Fara, and both cities were destroyed by fire pro- 
bably at the time when Lagash was wiped out. From 
the quantities of ashes, and from the fact that some of 
the bodies appeared to have been partially burnt, Dr. 
Koldewey erroneously concluded that the mounds 
marked the sites of " fire-necropoles," where he 
imagined the early Babylonians burnt tlieir dead, and 
the houses he regarded as tombs.^ But in no period 
of Sumerian or Babylonian history was this practice in 
vogue. The dead were always buried, and any appear- 
ance of burning must have been produced during the 
destruction of the cities by fire. ^Vt El-Hibba remains 
were also visible of buildings constructed wholly or in 
part of kiln-baked bricks, which, coupled with the greater 
extent of its mounds, suggests that it was a more impor- 
tant Sumerian city than Surghul. This has been con- 
firmed by the greater number of inscriptions which 
were found upon its site and have recently been 
published.' They include texts of the early patesis of 
Lagasli, Eannatum and Enannatum I, and of the later 
patesi Gudea. A text of Gudea was also found at 
Surgliul proving that both places were subject to 
Lagasli, in whose territory they were probably always 
included during the periods of that city's power. That, 
apart from the graves, few objects of achaeological or 
artistic interest were recovered, may in part be traced 
to their proximity to Lagash, wliich as the seat of 
government naturally enjoyed an ad\'antage in this 
respect over neighbouring towns. 

During the course of her early history the most 
persistent rival of Lagash was the neighbouring city 
of Umma,^ now identified with the mound of Jokha, 
lying some distance to the north-west in the region 
between tlie Shatt el-Hai and the Sliatt el-Kar. Its 

1 Cf. "Zeit8. fur Assyr /' II., pp. 406 ff. 

^ Cf. Messerschmidt, " Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmaler," p. v. f., 
pi. 1 ff. 

^ The name is still often transcribed as Gislikhu or Gishukh ; for the 
reading Umma. supplied by a Neo-Fabylonian vocabulary, see " Cun. Texts," 
XII., pi. 28, Obv., 1. 7, and cf. Ilrozny, " Zeits. fiir Assyr.," XX. (1907), 
pp. 421 ff. For its identification with Jokha, see Scheil, " Rec. de trav./' 
XIX., p. 63 ; cf. also XXL, p. 125. 


neighbourhood and part of the mound itself are covered 
with sand-dunes, which give the spot a very desohite 
appearance, but tliey are of recent formation, since 
between them can still be seen traces of former culti- 
vation. The principal mound is in the form of a ridge 
over half a mile long, running W.S.AV, to E.N.E. and 
rising at its highest point about fifteen metres above 
the plain. Two lower extensions of the principal 
mound stretch out to the east and soutii-east. 




No excavations have yet been conducted on this 
site, but it was visited by Dr. Andrae in the winter 
of 1902-3. He noted traces of a large building on a 
platform to the north of the principal ridge, marked 
A on the plan. It appears to have formed a square, 
its sides measuring seventy metres in length, and a 
small mound rises in the centre of it. Quantities of 
square, kiln-burnt bricks are scattered on the mound 
which covers it, and on the south side traces of a 


rectangular chamber are visible.^ Numerous fragments 
of diorite also suggest the presence of sculptures, and 
at the south corner of the building, at the spot marked 
with a cross on the plan, the Germans found a fragment 
of diorite with part of a carefully chiselled inscription 
in archaic characters. The occurrence of unglazed 
potsherds, flint implements, and plano-convex bricks 
on other parts of the mound are an indication tliat, 
like Fara, the site contains relics of still earlier habita- 
tion. INIoreover, it is said tliat for years past Arab 
diggings have been carried out there, and early tablets 
and three cones of the patesi Galu-Babbar have reached 
Europe from this site. In view of the promising traces 
he noted and of the important part which tlie 
city played in early Sumerian history, it is almost 
to be regretted that Dr. Andrae did not substitute 
Jokha for Abu Hatab as a site for his subsequent 

Other mounds in the same neighbourhood also 
suggest prospects of success for the future excavator. 
One of these is Hammam, which lies about seven and 
a half miles W.S.W. of Jokha and close to the bed of 
the Shatt el-Kar. It consists of a group of separate 
mounds, on one of which are the remains of a rect- 
angular building resembling a ziggurat or temple- 
tower. Its side measures thirty metres, and it rises 
to a height of twelve metres above the surface of the 
mound, which in turn is three metres above the plain. 
Clay, in which layers of reeds are embedded, has been 
spread between the bricks as at Warka. JNlore to the 
north of it in the same mound are traces of another 
building, possibly the temple of which it formed a part. 
To the south of Hammtlm, and a little oyer three miles 
to the west of the Shatt el-Kar is Tell 'Id, another site 
which might repay excavation. It consists of a well- 
defined mound, about thirty metres high at the summit, 
and is visible from a considerable distance. Unlike 
Hammam and Jokha, however, it shows no trace upon 
its surface of any building, and there are no potsherds, 
bricks, or other objects scattered on the mound to 

' Cf. 'SMitteil. der Deutsch. Orient-Gesellschaft," No. 16, p. 20 f. Dr. 
Andrae adds valuable notes on other mounds he visited during this journey. 


aiford an indication of its date. Both Tell 'Id and 
Hanimam stand on a slightly elevated tract of desert 
soil, some ten miles broad, \vhich raises them above 
the marshes caused by the inundations of the Euphrates. 
On the same tract farther to the south are Senkera and 
Warka, which Avere examined by I^oftus in the early 

Of the early sites in the region of the Shatt el-I\ar 
the moimds at Fara have been the most productive of 
remains dating from the prehistoric period of Sumerian 
culture. Systematic excavations were begun here by 
Dr. Koldewey in 1902,^ and were continued in the 
following year by Drs. Andrae and Noeldeke.^ The 
accompanying j;lan will give some idea of the ex- 
tensive area occupied by the mounds, and of the 
method adopted for ascertaining their contents with- 
out too great an expenditure of time. The Arabic 
numerals against the contour lines indicate their height 
in metres above the level of the plain. Roman figures 
are set at each end of the trenches in the order in which 
they were cut. Thus the first two trenches (I. and II.), 
running from north to south and from east to west 
respectively, were cut across the mounds by Dr. 
Koldewey to gain some idea of their general character. 
The subsequent trenches were all cut parallel to the 
second through the higher portions of the site, a few 
of them being extended so as to cover the lower 
detached mounds to the east. In the plan the trenches 
are marked as continuous, but actually each consists of 
a series of short sections, divided by bands of soil left 
uncut. These hold up the sides of the trench and 
leave passages for crossing from one side to the other.* 
Whenever a trench discloses the remains of a building 
it can be completely uncovered and the trench after- 
wards continued until another building is disclosed. 
In the plan the principal cleared areas are outlined, 

» See below, j). 33 f. 

2 See "Mittcil. der Deutsch. Orient-Gesellschaft," No. 15, p. Off. 

3 Op. cit., No. 17, p. 4ff. 

* Each section of a trciicli is also given a letter, so that such a symbol as 
IV. b or XII. X indicates within very precise limits the prnvnnince of any 
object discovered. The letter A on the plan marks tlie site of the house 
built by the expedition. 



and the position of walls which were uncovered within 
them is indicated by fine lines. 

In the course of the systematic excavation of the 
site, it was clearly established that all the mounds 
at Fara belong to a very early period. In many places 
the trenches cut through thick strata of ashes and 

charred remains, and it was seen that the whole settle- 
ment had been destroyed by fire, and that the greater 
part of it had never been reoccupied. All trace of 
buildings practically ceased at a depth of more than two 
metres beneath the present surface, and those that were 
excavated appear to belong to a single epoch. Their 
early period is attested by the fact that they are all 


built of plano-convex bricks/ both baked and unbaked, 
witii thumb-marks or lines impressed by the finger 
on their upper surftice. Many of them were clearly 
dwelling-houses, consisting of chambers grouped around 
a rectangular court; others are of circular form, measur- 
ing from two to five metres across, and their use has 
not been determined.^ It has been suggested that the 
latter may have served as wells, and it is true that they 
generally descend to a depth of about four metres 
below the level of the plain. 15ut they are scattered 
so thickly in the mound that this explanation of their 
use is scarcely adequate ; moreover each was roofed in 
with an arch of overlapping bricks laid horizontally. 
They may have been cisterns, or designed for receiving 
refuse-water from the houses, but against this view is to 
be set the fact that they are not connected in any way 
with the numerous brick channels and clay drains that 
were discovered. Similar constructions were found at 
Surghul, and nothing in the debris which filled them, 
either there or at Fara, has thrown light upon the 
purpose which they served. 

The most interesting discoveries at Fara were the 
graves. These consist of two classes, sarcophagus- 
graves and mat-burials. The sarcophagi are of un- 
glazed clay, oval in form, with flat bottoms and upright 
sides, and each is closed with a terra- cotta lid. In the 
mat-burials the corpse with its offerings was wrapped in 
reed-matting and placed in a grave dug in the soil. 
The bodies were never buried at length, for in both 
classes of graves the skeletons are found lying on their 
sides with their legs and arms bent. The right hand 
usually holds a drinking-cup, of clay, stone, copper or 
shell, which it appears to be raising to the mouth ; and 
near the skull are often other vessels and great water- 
pots of clay. In the graves the weapons of the dead 
man were placed, and the tools and ornaments he had 
used during life. Copper spear-heads and axes were 
often found, and the blades of daggers with rivets for a 
wooden handle, and copper fish-hooks and net-weights. 

' This form of brick is characteristic of the Pre-Sargonic period ; cf. p. 91. 
^ The positions of some of the larger ones, which were excavated iu the 
northern part of the mounds, are indicated by black dots iu the plan. 


/Jt'c. c-it Chald., pi. 51. 


The ornaments were very numerous, tlie wealthy 
wearing bead-necklaces of agate and lapis-lazuli, the 
poorer contenting themselves with paste or shell, while 
silver finger-rings and copper arm-rings were not un- 
common. A very typical class of grave-furniture con- 
sisted of palettes or colour-dishes, made of alabaster, 
often of graceful shape, and sometimes standing on four 
feet. There is no doubt as to their use, for colour 
still remains in many of them, generally black and 
yellow, but sometimes a light rose and a light green. 
Since all other objects in the graves were placed there 
for the personal use of the dead man, we may infer that 
colour was employed at that period for painting the 

No difference in age appears to have separated the 
two classes of burial, for the offerings are alike in each, 
and the arrangement of the bodies is the same. Why 
there should have been a difference in custom it is 
difficult to say. It might be inferred that the sarcopha- 
gus was a mark of wealth, were it not that the offerings 
they contain are generally more scanty than in the mat- 
burials. Whatever may be the explanation there is 
httle doubt that they belong to the same race and 
period. Moreover, we may definitely connect the 
graves with the buildings under which they are found, 
for in some of them were seal- cylinders precisely 
similar to others found in the debris covering the 
houses, and the designs upon them resemble those on 
sealings from the strata of ashes in the upper surface of 
the mounds. The seals are generally of shell or hme- 
stone, rarely of harder stone, and the designs represent 
heroes and mythological beings in conflict with animals. 
The presence of the sealings and seal-cylinders, resem- 
bling in form and design those of the early period at 
Tello, in itself suggests that Fara marks the site of an 
early Sumerian town. This was put beyond a doubt by 
the discovery of clay tablets in six of the houses,^ where 
they lay on the clay floor beneath masses of charred 
debris which had fallen from the roof ; beside them were 
objects of household use, and in one room the remains of 

' The bouses with the clay tablets were found in trenches VII., IX., XIII., 
and XV. 


a charred rced-niat were under them. The tablets were 
of unbaked clay, simihu' in ;.haj)e to early contracts 
from Tcllo, and the texts upon them, written in ex- 
tremely archaic characters, referred to deeds of sale. 

Tiiere is thus no doubt as to the racial character 
of the inhabitants of this early settlement. The dis- 
covery of a brick inscribed witli the name of Khaladda, 
patesi of Shiu-u})pak, proved that Fara was the site 
of the ancient city wliich later tradition regarded as 
the scene of the Deluge. Khaladda's inscription is not 
written in \'ery archaic characters, and he probably 
lived in the time of the kings of Sumcr and Akkad. 
We may tluis infer that Shuruppak continued to exist 
as a city at that period, but the greater part of the 
site was never asfain inhabited after the destruction of 
the early town by fire. We have described its remains 
in some detail as they are our most valuable source 
of information concerning the earliest Sumerians in 
Babylonia. Until the objects that were found have 
been published it is difficult to determine accurately 
its relation in date to the earlier remains at Tello. A 
few fragments of sculpture in relief were discovered 
in the course of the excavations, and these, taken in 
conjunction with the cylinder-seals, the inscribed tablets, 
and the pottery, suggest that no long interval separated 
its period from that of the earliest Sumerians of history. 

A less exhaustive examination of the neighbouring 
mounds of Abu Hatab was also undertaken by Drs. 
Andrae and Noeldeke. This site lies to the north of 
Fara, and, like it, is close to the Shatt el-Kar.^ The 
southern part of the tell could not be examined because 
of the modern Arab graves which here lie thick around 
the tomb of the Imam Sa'id Muhammad. But the 
trenches cut in the higher parts of tlie mound, to 
the north and along its eastern edge, sufficed to 

* In the folding map Fara has been set on the right bank of the Shatt el- 
Kar, in accordance witii Loftus's map published in " Travels and Researches 
in Chaldaea and Susiana." From Amlrae's notes it would seem that Abu 
Hatab, and probably Kara also, lie on the east or left bank. But the ancient 
bed of the stream has disappeared in many places, and is difficult to follow, 
and elsewhere there are traces of two or three parallel channels at consider- 
able distances apart, so that the exact position of the original bed of the 
Kuphrates \a not certain at this point. 



indicate its general character/ Earlier remains, such 
as were found at Fara, are here completely wanting, 

o I51AM SA 16 MUH/W^MAO 



<• 20 20 io to so loo 
OC. i 1 l_ 

and it would appear to be not earlier than the period 
of the kings of Sumer and Akkad. This is indicated 

1 111 tlie plan the trenches and excavated sites are lettered from A to K. 
The figures, preceded by a cross, give in metres and centimetres the height 
of the mound at that point above the level of the plain. 


by bricks of Bur-Siii T., King of Ur, which were dis- 
co\'ered scattered in debris in the north-west part of 
the mound, and by the finding of case-tablets in the 
houses belonging to the period of the dynasties of Ur 
and Isin.^ The graves also differed from those at Fara, 
generally consisting of pot-burials. Here, in place of 
a shallow trough with a lid, the sarcophagus was formed 
of two great pots, deeply ribbed on the outside ; these 
were set, one over the other, with their edges meeting, 
and after burial they were fixed together by means 
of pitch, or bitumen. 1'he skeleton is usually found 
within lying on its back or side in a crouching position 
with bent legs. The general arrangement of drinking- 
cups, offerings, and ornaments resembles that in the 
Fara burials, so that the difference in the form of the 
sarcophagus is merely due to a later custom and not 
to any racial change. Very similar burials were found 
by Taylor at INIukayyar, and others have also been 
unearthed in the earlier strata of the mounds at 

The majority of the houses at Abii Hatab appear 
to have been destroyed by fire, and, in view of the 
complete absence of later remains, the tablets scattered 
on their floors indicate the period of its latest settle- 
ment. It thus represents a well-defined epoch, later 
than that of the mounds at Fara, and most valuable 
for comparison with them. At neither Fara nor Abii 
Hatab were the remains of any important building or 
temple disclosed, but the graves and houses of the 
common people have furnished information of even 
greater value for the archaeologist and historian. 
Another mound which should provide further material 
for the study of this earliest period is Bismaya, the 
site of the city at Adab, at which excavations were 
begun on December 25, 1903 by the University of 
Chicago and continued during the following year.^ 
The mound of Hetime to the west of Fara, may, to 

' Itiir-Shamasli, whose biick-iu8cription furnished the information that 
Abu Ilatab is the site of the city Kisurra, is to be set towards the end of 
this period ; see below, Chap. XI., and cf. p. 283 f., n. 1. 

2 See the extracts from the " Reports of the Expedition of the Oriental 
Exploration Fund (Babylonian Section) of the University of Chicago," which 
were issued to the subscribers. 



judge from the square bricks and fragments of pot- 
burials that are found there, date from about the same 
period as Abu Hatab. But it is of small extent and 
height, the greater part being merely six or seven 
feet above the plain, while its two central mounds 
rise to a height of less than fourteen feet. 

Such are the principal early Sumerian mounds in 
the region of the Shatt el-Kar and the Shatt el-Hai. 
Other mounds in the same neighbourhood may well 
prove to be of equally early dates ; but it should be 
noted that some of these do not cover Sumerian cities, 
but represent far later periods of occupation. The 
character of the extensive mound of Jidr to the east of 
Fara and Abu Hatab is doubtful ; but the use of lime- 
mortar in such remains as are visible upon the surface 
indicates a late epoch. A number of smaller tells may 
be definitely regarded as representing a settlement in 
this district during Sassanian times. Such are Duba'i, 
which, with two others, lies to the south of Fara, and 
Bint el-Mderre to the east ; to the same period may be 
assigned JNlenedir, which lies to the north-east, beyond 
Deke, the nearest village to Fara. This last mound, 
little more than a hundred yards long, covers the site of 
a burial-place ; it has been completely burrowed through 
by the Arabs in their search for antiquities, and is now 
covered with fragments of sarcophagi. The mounds of 
Mjelli and Abu Khuwasij to the west of Fara are 
probably still later, and belong to the Arab period. 

It will have been noted that all the Sumerian 
mounds described or referred to in the preceding para- 
graphs cover cities which, after being burned down and 
destroyed in a comparatively early period, were never 
reoccupied, but were left deserted. Lagash, Umma, 
Shuruppak, Ki surra, and Adab play no part in the 
subsequent history of Babylonia. We may infer that 
they perished during the fierce struggle which took 
place between the Babylonian kings of the First 
Dynasty and the Elamite kings of Larsa. At this 
time city after city in Sumer was captured and retaken 
many times, and on Samsu-iluna's final victory over 
Rim-Sin, it is probable that he decided to destroy many 
of the cities and make the region a desert, so as to put 


an end to trouble for the future. As a matter of fact, 
lie only succeeded in shiftin^^ the area of disturbance 
southwards, for the Sunierian inhabitants fled to the 
Sea-country on the shores of the Persian Gulf; and 
to their inHuence, and to the reinforcements they 
brought with them, may be traced the troubles of 
Samsu-iluna and his son at tlie hands of lluma-ilu, 
Avho had already established his indej)endence in this 
region. Thus Samsu-iluna's policy of repression was 
scarcely a success ; but the archaeologist has reason to 
be gratcl'ul to it. The undisturbed condition of these 
early cities renders their excavation a com])aratively 
simple matter, and lends a certainty to conclusions 
drawn from a study of their remains, which is neces- 
sarily lacking in the ease of more complicated sites. 

Another class of Sumerian cities consists of those 
which were not finally destroyed by the Western 
Semites, but continued to be important centres of 
political and social life during the later periods of 
Babylonian history. NiiTer, Warka, Senkera, Mukay- 
yar, and Abu Shahrain all doubtless contain in their 
lower strata remains of the early Sumerian cities which 
stood upon their sites ; but the greater part of the 
mounds are made up of ruins dating from a period not 
earlier than that of the great builders of the Dynasty 
of Ur. In Nippur, during the American excavations 
on this site, the history of Ekm-, the temple of the god 
Enlil, was traced back to the period of Shar-Gani- 
Sharri and Narfmi-Sin ; ^ and fragments of early vases 
found scattered in the debris beneath the chambers on 
the south-east side of the Ziggurat, have thrown valu- 
able light upon an early period of Sumerian history. 
Init the excavation of the pre-Sargonic strata, so far as 
it has yet been carried, has given negative rather than 
positive results. The excavations carried out on the 
other sites referred to were of a purely tentative cha- 
racter, and, although they were made in the early fifties 
of last century, they still remain the principal source of 
our knowledge concerning them. 

Some idea of the extent of the mounds of Warka 
may be gathered from Loftus's plan. The irregular 

* See below. Chap. 1\'., pp. 85 fF. 



circle of the mounds, marking the later walls of the 
city, covers an area nearly six miles in circumference, 
and in view of this fact and of the short time and 
limited means at his disposal, it is surprising that he 
should have achieved such good results. His work at 
Buwariya, the principal mound of the group (marked A 

on the plan), resulted in its identification with E-anna, 
the gi'eat temple of the goddess Ninni, or Islitar, which 
was enormously added to in the reign of Ur-Engur. 
Loftus's careful notes and drawings of the facade of 
another important building, covered by the mound 
kno-vvn as Wuswas (B), have been of great value from 
the architectural point of view, while no less interesting is 



his description of the *' Cone Wall " (at E on the plan), 
consisting in great part of terra-cotta cones, dipped in 
red or hhick colour, and arranged to form various 
patterns on the surface of a wall composed of mud and 
chopped straw.' Ikit the date of both these construc- 
tions is uncertain. The sarcophagus -graves and pot- 
burials which he came across when cutting his tunnels 
and trenches are clearly contemporaneous with those at 







?oo ICO i,t>o seo 
— 1 1 r I Vo^ 

■'f A ,-;«»>? >^ f -fe.-,, ]r9V i^";. 




4. =^«S5'^^=i ...^i*f^ 



y^^MMfi'^V^'^ht-f GRAVES 

f Jf 

Abu Hatab, and tlie mound may well coiitahi still 
earlier remains. The finds made in the neighbouring 
mounds of Scnkera (Larsa), and Tell Sifr, were also 
promising,- and, in spite of his want of success at Tell 
Medina, it is possible that a longer examination would 
have yielded better results. 

Tiie mounds of Mukayyar, wliich mark tlie site of Ur, 

» See " Chalilaoa aii.l Siisiaiia/' pp. 17^ H'. and iUlif. 
2 Op. cit., pp. 244 ff., 2GG If. 


the centre of tlie Moon-god's cult in Sumer, were partly 
excavated by Taylor in 1854 and 1855.^ In the northern 
portion of the group he examined the great temple of 
the ]Moon-god (marked A on the plan), the earliest 
portions of its structure whicli he came across dating 
from the reigns of Dungi and Ur-Engur. Beneath a 
building in the neighbourhood of the temple (at B on 
the plan) he found a pavement consisting of plano- 
convex bricks, a sure indication that at this point, at 
least, were buildings of the earliest Sumerian period, 
while the sarcophagus-burials in other parts of the 
mound were of the early type. Taylor came across 
similar evidence of early building at Abu Shahrain,' the 
comparatively small mound which marks the site of the 
sacred city of Eridu, for at a point in the south-east 
side of the group he uncovered a building constructed 
of bricks of the same early character. 

At Abu Shahrain indeed we should expect to find 
traces of one of the earliest and most sacred shrines of the 
Sumerians, for here dwelt Enki, the mysterious god of 
the deep. The remains of his later temple now domi- 
nates the group, the great temple -tower still rising in 
two stages (A and B) at the northern end of the mound. 
Unlike the other cities of Sumer, Eridu was not built 
on the alluvium. Its situation is in a valley on the 
edge of the Arabian desert, cut off from Ur and the 
Euphrates by a low pebbly and sandstone ridge. In 
fact, its ruins appear to rise abruptly from the bed of 
an inland sea, which no doubt at one time was con- 
nected directly with the Persian Gulf; hence the 
description of Eridu in cuneiform literature as standing 
" on the shore of the sea." Another characteristic 
which distinguishes Eridu from other cities in Babylonia 
is the extensive use of stone as a building material. The 
raised platform, on which the city and its temple stood, 
was faced with a massive retaining wall of sandstone. 

' See his '-Notes on the ruins of Mugeyer" in the Journal of the Royal 
Asiatic Society, 18o.5, pp. 200 tf., 414f. 

2 See his "Notes on Abii Shahrein and Tel el-Lahm/' op. cit., p. 409. 
ITie trench which disclosed this structure, built of uniuscribed plauo-couvex 
bricks laid in bitumen, was cut near the south-eastern side of the ruins, 
between the mounds ¥ and G (see plan), and to the north-east of the gulley. 


no doubt obtained from quarries in the neighbour- 
hood, ^viule the stairway (marked D on the plan) leading 
to the iirst stjige of the temple-tower had been formed of 
polished marble slabs whieli were now scattered on the 
surface of the mound. The marble stairs and the 
numerous fragments of gold-leaf and gold -headed and 

III r W ' 

r^ - I 

7 •;■■''';,<■■■- 



c: u 






J m. 

copper nails, which Taylor found at the base of the 
second stage of the temple-tower, attest its magnifi- 
cence during the latest stage of its history. The name 
and period of tlie city now covered by the neighbouring 
mound of Tell Lahm, which w^as also examined by 
Taylor, have not yet been ascertained. 

It will thus be seen that excavations conducted on 
the sites of the more famous cities of Sumer have not, 


with the single exception of Nippur, yielded much 
information concerning the earlier periods of history, 
while the position of one of them, the city of Isin, is 
still unknown. Our knowledge of similar sites in Akkad 
is still more scanty. Up to the present time systematic 
excavations have been carried out at only two sites in 
the north, Babylon and Sippar, and these have thrown 
little light upon the more remote periods of their 
occupation. The existing ruins of Babylon date from 
the period of Nebuchadnezzar II., and so thorough was 
Sennacherib's destruction of the city in G89 B.C., that, 
after several years of work. Dr. Koldewey concluded 
that all traces of earlier buildings had been destroyed on 
that occasion. INIore recently some remains of earlier 
strata have been recognized, and contract-tablets have 
been found which date from the period of the First 
Dynasty. Moreover, a number of earlier pot-burials 
have been unearthed, but a careful examination of the 
greater part of the ruins has added little to our know- 
ledge of this most famous city before the Neo-Babylonian 
era. The same negative results were obtained, so far as 
early remains are concerned, from the less exhaustive 
work on the site of Borsippa. Abu Habba is a far 
more promising site, and has been the scene of excava- 
tions begun by Mr. Rassam in 1881 and 1882, and 
renewed by Pere Scheil for some months in 1894, while 
excavations were undertaken in the neighbouring 
mounds of Deir by Dr. Wallis Budge in 1891. These 
two sites have yielded thousands of tablets of the period 
of the earliest kings of Babylon, and the site of the 
famous temple of the Sun-god at Sippar, which Naram- 
Sin rebuilt, has been identified, but little is yet accu- 
rately known concerning the early city and its suburbs. 
The great extent of the mounds, and the fact that for 
nearly thirty years they have been the happy hunting- 
ground of Arab diggers, would add to the difficulty of 
any final and exhaustive examination. It is probal)ly 
in the neighbourhood of Sippar that the site of the city 
of Agade, or Akkad, will eventually be identified. 

Concerning the sites of other cities in Northern 
Babylonia, considerable uncertainty still exists. The 
extensive mounds of Tell Ibrahim, situated about four 


hours to the north-east of Hilla, are probably to be 
identified with Cutha, the eentre of the cult of Nergal, 
but the mound of 'Akarkuf, which may be seen from so 
^reat a distance on the road between Baghdad and 
Faluja, probably covers a temple and city of the Kassite 
period. Both the cities of Kish and Opis, which figure 
so prominently in the early history of the relations 
between Sumer and Akkad, were, until quite recently, 
tliought to be situated close to one another on the 
Tigris. That Opis lay on that river and not on the 
Eupln-ates is clear from the account which Nebuchad- 
nezzar II. has left us of his famous fortifications of 
Babylon/ which are referred to by Greek writers as 
"the Median Wall" and *' the Fortification of 

The outermost ring of Nebuchadnezzar's triple line 
of defence consisted of an earthen rampart and a ditch, 
which he tells us extended from the bank of the Tigris 
above Opis to a point on the Euphrates within the city 
of Sippar, proving that Opis is to be sought upon the 
former river. His second line of defence was a similar 
ditch and rampart which stretched from the causeway 
on the bank of the Euphrates up to the city of Kish. 
It was assumed that this rampart also extended to the 
Tigris, although this is not stated in the text, and, since 
the ideogram for Opis is once rendered as Kesh in a 
bilingual incantation,'^ it seemed probable that Kish and 
Opis were twin cities, both situated on the Tigris at no 
great distance from each other. This view appeared to 
find corroboration in the close association of the two 
})laces during the wars of Eannatum, and in the fact 
that at the time of Enbi-Ishtar they seem to have 
formed a single state. But it has recently been shown 
that Kish lay upon the Euphrates,^ and we may thus 

» See Weisshach, " Wiidi Brissa," Col. VI., 11. 4Gff., and cf. pp. 39flF. 

^ Tlie incantation is tlie one which has furnished us with aiitliority for 
reading the name of Shirpurla as Lagash (see ahove, p. 17, n. 3). It is directed 
ag-ainst the machinations of evil demons, and in one passap^e the powers for 
f^ood inliercnt in tiie ancient cities of Babylonia are invoked on behalf of the 
possessed man. Here, alonj? with tlie names of Eridu, Lagash, and Shuruppak, 
occurs the ideogram for Opis, which is rendered in the Assyrian translation 
as I\i-e-sld, i.e. Ke-li, or \\\s\\ (cf. Thompson, " Devils and Evil SpiritSj" 
vol. i., i>. 102 f.). 

^ See above, p. 9. 


accept its former identification with the mound of El- 
Ohemir where bricks were found by Iver Porter record- 
ing the building of E-meteursagga, tlie temple of 
Zamama, the patron deity of Kish.^ Whether Opis is 
to be identified with the extensive mounds of Tell 
Manjur, situated on the right bank of the Tigris in the 
great bend made by the river between Samarra and 
Baghdad, or whether, as appears more probable, it is to 
be sought further down stream in the neighbourhood 
of Seleucia, are questions which future excavation may 

The brief outline that has been given of our know- 
ledge concerning the early cities of Sumer and Akkad, 
and of the results obtained by the partial excavation of 
their sites, wall have served to show how much still 
remains to be done in this field of archaeological re- 
search. Not only do the majority of the sites still 
await systematic excavation, but a large part of the 
material already obtained has not yet been published. 
Up to the present time, for instance, only the briefest 
notes have been given of the important finds at Fara 
and Abu Hatab. In contrast to this rather leisurely 
method of publication, the plan followed by M. de 
Morgan in making available without delay the results 
of his work in Persia is strongly to be commended. In 
this connection mention should in any case be made of 
the excavations at Susa, since they have brought to 
light some of the most remarkable monuments of the 
early Semitic kings of Akkad. It is true the majority 
of these had been carried as spoil from Babylonia to 
Elam, but they are none the less precious as examples 
of early Semitic art. Such monuments as the recently 
discovered stele of Sharru-Gi, the statues of JManishtusu, 
and Naram-Sin's stele of victory afford valuable evi- 
dence concerning the racial characteristics of the early 

1 See George Smith, "Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," III., p. 364, and cf. 
Thureau-Dangin, ''Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1909, col. 205 f. 

2 The fact that in an early Babylonian geographical listC'Cun. Inscr. 
West. Asia," Vol. IV., pi. 30, No. 1) the name of Opis is mentioned after a 
number of Sumerian cities, is no indication that the city itself, or another 
city of the same name, was regarded as situated in Sumer, as suggested by 
Jensen (cf '■ Zeits. fiir Assyr.," X\'., pp. 210 ff.) ; the next two names in the 
list are those of Magan and Melukhkha. 


inhabitants of Northern Babylonia, and enable us to trace 
some of the stages in their artistic development. But 
in Akkad itself tlie excavations have not thrown much 
light upon these subjects, nor have they contributed to 
the solution of the problems as to the period at which 
Sumerians and Semites first came in contact, or which 
race was first in possession of the land. For the study 
of these questions our material is mainly furnished from 
the Sumerian side, more particularly by the sculptures 
and inscriptions discovered during tlie French excava- 
tions at Tello. 

It is now generally recognized that the two races 
which inhabited Sumer and iVkkad during the early 
historical periods were sharply divided from one another 
not only by their speech but also in their physical 
characteristics.^ One of the principal traits by which 
they may be distinguished consists in the treatment of 
the hair. While the Sumerians invariably shaved the 
head and face, the Semites retained the hair of the head 
and wore long beards. A slight modification in the 
dressing of the hair was introduced by the Western 
Semites of the First Babylonian Dynasty, who brought 
with them from Syria the Canaanite Bedouin custom of 
shaving the lips and allowing the beard to fall only 
from the chin ; while they also appear to have cut the 
hair short in the manner of the Arabs or Nabateans of 
the Sinai peninsula.^ The Semites who were settled 
in Babylonia during the earlier period, retained the 
moustache as well as the beard, and wore their hair long. 
AVhile recognizing the slight change of custom, intro- 
duced for a time during the West Semitic domination, 
the practice of wearing hair and beard was a Semitic 
characteristic during all periods of history. The phrase 
" the black-headed ones," Avhich is of frequent occurrence 
in the later texts, clearly originated as a description 
of the Semites, in contradistinction to the Sumerians 
with their shaven heads. 

Another distinctive characteristic, almost equally 

' For the fullest treatnuMit of this subject, see Meyer, " Sumerier uiul 
Spiniten in Babylouieu " (Abh. der Kiinigl. Preiiss. Akad. der VVissenscliaft. , 

■^ Cf. Herodotus, III., 8. 


T.IMI>TONK 1 1(;lkK Or AN K.\'KI,\ >r.MKkl\N I'ATI-SI. 


Hiit. Miis.. Xo. goo3Q ; ///.>.',». ly Messrs. MnitSfU i!r Co. 



striking, may be seen in the features of the ftice as 
represented in the oiithne engraving and in the sculpture 
of the earher periods. It is true that the Sumerian had 
a prominent nose, whicli forms, indeed, his most striking 
feature, but both nose and lips are never full and fleshy 
as "with the Semites. It is sometimes claimed that 
such primitive representations as occur upon Ur-Nina's 
bas-rehefs, or in Fig. 1 in the accompanying block, are 
too rude to be regarded as representing accurately an 
ethnological type. But it will be noted that the same 
general characteristics are also found in the later and 
more finished sculptures of Gudea's period. This fact 
is illustrated by the two black diorite heads of statu- 
ettes figured on the following page. In both examples 

Fig. 1. 

Fig. 2. 

Figures of early Sumerians, engraved upon fragments of shell, which were 
probably employed for inlaying boxes, or for ornamenting furniture. Earliest 
period : from Tello, 

[D^c, pi. 46, Nos. 2 and 1.] 

certain archaic conventions are retained, such as the 
exaggerated line of the eyebrows, and the unfinished 
ear ; but nose and lips are obviously not Semitic, 
and they accurately reproduce the same racial type 
which is found upon the earlier reliefs. 

A third characteristic consists of the different forms 
of dress worn by Sumerians and Semites, as represented 
on the monuments. The earliest Sumerians wore only 
a thick woollen garment, in the form of a petticoat, 
fastened round the waist by a band or girdle. The 
gannent is sometimes represented as quite plain, in 
other cases it has a scolloped fringe or border, while in 
its most elaborate form it consists of three, four, or five 
horizontal flounces, each lined vertically and scolloped 


at the edge to represent thick locks of wool/ With 
the hiter Sumcriuii patcsis tliis rough garment has 
been given up in i;n our of a great shawl or mantle, 
decorated M'ith a border, which was worn over the left 
shoulder, and, falhng in straight folds, draped the body 
with its opening in front.^ Botli these Sumerian forms 
of garment are of quite different types from the Semitic 
loin-cloth worn by Naram-Sin on his stele of victory, 
and tlie Semitic plaid in wliicli he is represented on his 
stele from Pir Hussein.^ The latter garment is a long, 
narrow plaid whicli is wrapped round the body in 
parallel bands, with the end thrown over the left 

Fig. 3. 

Fig. 4. 

Fig. 5. 

Later tj^jos of Sumeriaiis, as exhibited by beads of male statuettes from Telle. 
Figs. 4 and 5 are diflerent viov, s of the same head, which probably dates from the 
ago of Gudea ; Fig. 3 may possibly be assigned to a rather later period. 
[In the Louvre ; Cat. Nos. 95 and 93.] 

shoulder. It has no slit, or opening, in front like the 
later Sumerian mantle, and, on the other hand, was not 
a shaped garment like the earlier Sumerian flounced 

• 'I'he women of the earlier i)eriod appear to liave worn a modified form of 
this garment, made of the same rou^h wool, but worn over the left shoulder 
(see below, p. 112, Fig. 43). On tlieStele of tlie \'ultines, Kannatum, like his 
soldiers, wears the petticoat, but this is supplemented by Avhat is obviously a 
sejiarate garment of diflferent texture thrown over the left shoulder so as to 
leave the right arm free ; this may have been the skin of an animal worn 
with the natural liair outside (see the plate opposite p. 124). 

2 A very similar fringed mantle was usually worn by the Sumerian women 
of the later period, l)ut it was draped differently upon the body. Pressed at 
first over the breasts and luider each arm, it is crossed at the back and its 
ends, thrown over tli«! shoulders, fall in front in two symmetrical points ; for 
a good example of the garment as seen from the front, see below, p. 71. 

3 See below, p. 245, Fig. 5'.i. 


petticoat, though both were doubtless made of wool 
and were probably dyed in bright colours. 

Two distinct racial types are thus represented on 
the monuments, differentiated not only by physical 
features but also by the method of treating the hair and 
by dress. IMoreover, the one type is characteristic of 
those rulers whose language was Sumerian, the other 
represents those whose inscriptions are in the Semitic 
tongue. Two apparent inconsistencies should here be 
noted. On the Stele of the Vultures, Eannatum and 
his soldiers are sculptured with thick hair flowing from 
beneath their helmets and falling on their shoulders. 
But they have shaven faces, and, in view of the fact 
that on the same monument all the dead upon the field 
of battle and in the burial mounds have shaven heads, 
like those of the Sumerians assisting at the burial and 
the sacrificial rites, we may regard the hair of Eannatum 
and his warriors as wigs, worn like the wigs of the 
Egyptians, on special occasions and particularly in 
battle. The other inconsistency arises from the dress 
worn by Hammurabi on his monuments. This is not 
the Semitic plaid, but the Sumerian fringed mantle, 
and we may conjecture that, as he wrote his votive 
inscriptions in the Sumerian as well as in the Semitic 
language, so, too, he may have symbolized his rule in 
Sumer by the adoption of the Sumerian form of dress. 

It is natural that upon monuments of the later 
period from Tello both racial types should be repre- 
sented. The fragments of sculpture illustrated in 
Figs. 6 and 7 may possibly belong to the same monu- 
ment, and, if so, we must assign it to a Semitic king.^ 
That on the left represents a file of nude captives with 
shaven heads and faces, bound neck to neck with the 
same cord, and their arms tied behind them. On the 
other fragment both captive and conqueror are bearded. 
The latter 's nose is anything but Semitic, though in 
figures of such small proportions carved in relief it 
would perhaps be rash to regard its shape as significant. 
The treatment of the hair, however, in itself constitutes 

* Remains of an inscription upon Fig. 6 treat of the dedication of a 
temple to the godNingirsu, and to judge from the characters it probably doea 
not date from a period earlier than that of Gudea. 


a sufficiently marked difference in racial custom. Fig. 8 
represents a circular support of steatite, around which 
are seated seven little figures liolding tablets on their 
knees ; it is here reproduced on a far smaller scale than 
the other fragments. The little figure that is best pre- 
served is of unmistakably Semitic type, and wears a 
curled beard trinuncd to a point, and hair that falls on 

Fig. 6. 

Fig. J. 

Fig. 8. 

Examples of sculpture of the latei period, from Tcllo, representing different 
racial types. 

[D^c, pi. 26, Figs. 106 and 10a ; pi. 21, Fig. 5.] 

the shoulders in two great twisted tresses ; the face of 
the figure on his left is broken, but the head is clearly 
shaved. A similar mixture of types upon a single 
monument occurs on a large fragment of sculpture 
representing scenes of worship,^ and also on Sharru-Gi's 
monument which has been found at Susa.^ 

At the period from which these sculptures date it is 
not questioned that the Semites were in occupation of 
Akkad, and that during certain periods they had already 
extended their authority over Sumer. It is not sur- 
prising, therefore, that at this time both Sumerians and 

' See the plate facing p. 52, and of. p. G8 f. 
* See below. Chap. VIII., pp. 220 ff. 



Semites should be represented side by side upon the 
monuments. When, however, we examine what is 
undoubtedly one of the earliest sculptured reliefs from 
Tello the same mixture of racial types is met with. 

Fig. 9. 

Fia. 10. 

i'lu. 11. 

Fragments of a circular bas-relief of the earliest period, from Tello, sculptured 
with a scene representing the meeting of two chieftains and their followers. The 
difierent methods of treating the hair are noteworthy. 

[In the Louvre ; Cat. No. 5.] 

The object is unfortunately broken into fragments, but 
enough of them have been recovered to indicate its 
character. Originally, it consisted of two circular blocks, 
placed one upon the other and sculptured on their outer 
edge with reliefs. They were perforated vertically with 


two holes -which were intended to support maces, or 
otlior votive ohjccts, in an iipviL,^lit position. The figures 
in the rehcf form two se})arate rows which advance 
towards one another, and at their head are two chiefs, 
wlio are represented meeting face to face (Fig. 9). It 
will be noticed that the cliicf on the left, who carries a 
bent club, has long hair faUing on the shoulders and is 
bearded. Four of his followers on another fragment 
(Fig. 10) also have long hair and beards. The other 
chief, on tlie contrary, wears no hair on his face, only on 
his head, and, since his followers have shaven heads and 
faces, ^ we may conjecture that, like Eannatum on the 
Stele of the Vultures, he wears a wig. All the figures 
are nude to the waist, and the followers clasp their 
hands in token of subordination to their chiefs. 

The extremely rude character of the sculpture is a 
sufficient indication of its early date, apart from the 
fact that the fragments were found scattered in the 
lowest strata at Tello. The fashion of indicating 
the hair is very archaic, and is also met with in a 
class of copper foundation-figures of extremely early 
date." The monument belongs to a period when 
writing -was already employed, for there are slight 
traces of an inscription on its upper surface, which 
probably recorded the occasion of the meeting of the 
chiefs. Moreover, from a fifth fragment that has 
been discovered it is seen that the names and titles 
of the various personages were engraved upon their 
garments. The monument thus belongs to the earliest 
Sumerian period, and, if we may apply the rule as to 
tlie treatment of the hair which we have seen holds 
good for tlie later periods, it would follow that at this 
time tlie Semite was already in the land. The scene, 
in fact, would represent the meeting of two early 
chieftains of tlie Sumcrians and Semites, sculptured 
to commemorate an agreement or treaty which they 
had drawn up. 

* According; to the traces on the stone the figure immediately behind the 
beardless chief has a shaven head and face, like his other two folluuers in 
Fiar. 3. The figure on the right of this fragment wears hair and heard, and 
j>robably represents a mcnil)er of the opposite party conducting them into the 
presence of his master. 

' Sec '' Dec. en C haldee," pi. 1 hi.s; Figs. 3 7. 



By a similar examination of the gods of the 
Sumerians, as they are represented on the monuments, 
Professor INIeyer has sought to show that the Semites 
were not only in Babylonia at the date of the earliest 
Sumerian sculptures that have been recovered, but also 
that they were in occupation of the country before the 
Sumerians. The type of the Sumerian gods at the 
later period is well illustrated by a limestone panel of 

Fig. 12. 

Limestone panel sculptured in relief, with a scene representing Gudea being 
led by Ningiahzida and another god into the presence of a deity who is seated on 
a throne. 

[In the Berlin Museum ; c/. Sum. und Sent., Taf. VII.] 

Gudea, which is preserved in the Berlin ^luseum. The 
sculptured scene is one that is often met with on 
cylinder-seals of the period, representing a suppUant 
being led by lesser deities into the presence of a greater 
god. In this instance Gudea is being led by his patron 
deity Ningishzida and another god into the presence 
of a deity who was seated on a throne and held a vase 
from which two streams of water flow. The ri^ht half 

but the flgure of the seated god 

of the panel is broken, 


may be in part restored from the similar scene upon 
Gudca's cylinder-seal. There, however, the symbol of 
the spouting vase is multiplied, for not only does the 

god hold one in each hand, but 
— three others are below his feet, and 
into them the water falls and spouts 
again. Professor JNIeyer woidd 
identify the god of the waters with 
Anu, though there is more to be 
said for M. Heuzey's view that he 
is Enki, the god of the deep. We 
are not here concerned, however, 
with the identity of the deities, but 
Fig. 13. with the racial type they represent. 

Figure of the seated god on It Will be sccn that they all liave 
the cylinder w^ofGudea. ^.^ir and bcards and wear the Se- 
mitic plaid, and form a striking 
contrast to Gudea with his shaven head and face, and 
his fringed Sumerian mantle.^ 

A very similar contrast is represented by the 
Sumerian and his gods in the earlier historical periods. 
Upon the Stele of the Vultures, for instance, the god 
Ningirsu is represented with abundant hair, and although 
his lips and cheeks are shaved a long beard falls from 
below his chin.^ He is girt around the waist with a 
plain garment, which is not of the later Semitic type, 
but the treatment of the hair and beard is obviously 
not Sumerian. The same bearded type of god is found 
upon early votive tablets from Nippur,^ and also on a 
fragment of an archaic Sumerian relief from Tello, 
which, from the rudimentary character of the work 
and the style of the composition, has been regarded as 
the most ancient example of Sumerian sculpture known. 
The contours of the figures are vaguely indicated in low 

' The fact that on seals of tliis later period tlie Moon-god is represented 
in the Sumerian mantle and headdress may well have been a result of tlie 
Sumerian reaction, which took place under the kings of Ur (see below, 
p. 28.3 f.). 

2 See below, p. 131, Fig. 4G. 

^ See p. 40. In Fig. 14 the hair and heard of tlie god who leads the 
worsliipper into tlie presence of the goddess is clearer on the original stone. 
In Fig. 15 the locks of liair and long beards of tlie seated gods are more 
sharply outlined ; they form a striking contrast to the figures of Sumerians, 
who are represented as pouring out libations and bringing offerings to the 



relief upon a flat plaque, and the interior details are 
indicated only by the point. The scene is evidently of 
a mythological character, for the seated figure may be 
recognized as a goddess by the horned crown she wears. 
Beside her stands a god who turns to smite a bound 
captive with a heavy club or mace. \Vhile the captive 
has the sliaven head and face of a Sumerian, the god 
has abundant hair and a long beard.^ 

Man forms his god in his own image, and it is 

FiQ. 14. 

Fig. 15. 

Votive tablets from Nippur, engraved with scenes of worship. 
[Cf. Hilprecht, Explorations, p. 475, and Old Bab. Inscr., II., pi. xvi.] 

surprising that tlie gods of the Sumerians should not 
be of the Sumerian type. If the Sumerian shaved his 
own head and face, M'hy should he have figured his 
gods with long beards and abundant hair and have 
clothed them with the garments of another race ? 
Professor Meyer's answer to the question is that the 
Semites and their gods were already in occupation of 
Sumer and Akkad before the Sumerians came upon 
the scene. He would regard the Semites at this early 

1 See p. 50, Fig. 16. 



period as settled tliroiigliout the whole country, a 
primitive and uncultured people with only sufficient 
knowlcdtre of art to embody the fitiures of their gods 
in rude images of stone or clay. There is no doubt 
that the Sumerians were a warrior folk, and he would 
picture them as invading tlie country at a later date, 
and overwhelming Semitic opposition by their superior 
weapons and metliod of attack. The Sumerian method 
of fighting he would comj)are to that of the Dorians 
with their closed phalanx of lance-bearing warriors, 
though the comparison is not quite complete, since no 
knowledge of iron is postulated on the part of the 

Fig. 16, 

Sumerian deities on an archaic relief from Tello. 
[Die, pi. 1, Fig. 1.] 

Sumerians. He would regard the invaders as settling 
mainly in the south, driving many of the Semites 
northward, and takinij over from tliem the ancient 
centres of Semitic cult. They would naturally have 
brought their own gods with them, and these they 
would identify witli tlie deities they found in possession 
of the shrines, combining tlieir attributes, but retaining 
the cult-images, whose sacred character would ensure 
the permanent retention of their outward form. The 
Sumerians in turn would have influenced their Semitic 
subjects and nciglibours, wlio would gradually have 
acquired from them their higlier culture, including a 
knowledge of writing and the arts. 


It may be admitted that the theory is attractive, and 
it certainly furnishes an explanation of the apparently 
foreign character of the Sumerian gods. But even 
from the archaeological side it is not so complete 
nor so convincing as at first sight it would appear. 
Since the later Sumerian gods were represented with 
full moustache and beard, like the earliest figures of 
Semitic kings which we possess, it would naturally be 
supposed that they would have this form in the still 
earlier periods of Sumerian history. But, as we have 
seen, their lips and cheeks are shaved. Are we then 
to postulate a still earlier Semitic settlement, of a 
rather different racial type to that which founded the 
kingdom of Kish and the empire of Akkad ? Again, 

Fig. 17. Fig. 18. Fig. 19. 

Earlier and later forms of divine headdresses. Figs. 17 and 18 are from tho 
obverse of the Stele of the Vultures, fragments C and B ; Fig. 19, the later form 
of horned headdress, is from a sculpture of Gudea. 

[Die, pi. 4, and pi. 26, No. 9.] 

the garments of the gods in the earliest period have 
little in common with the Semitic plaid, and are nearer 
akin to the plainer form of garment worn by con- 
temporary Sumerians. The divine headdress, too, is 
different to the later form, the single horns which 
encircle what may be a symbol of the date-palm,* giving 
place to a plain conical headdress decorated with several 
pairs of horns. 

Thus, important differences are observable in the 
form of the earlier Sumerian gods and their dress and 
insignia, which it is difficult to reconcile with Professor 
JNIeyer's theory of their origin. JNIoreover, the principal 

* Cf. Langdou, " Babyloniaca,'' II. , p. 142 ; this explanation is preferable 
to treating the crowns as a featliered form of headdress. The clianges in the 
dress of the Sumerian godsj and in the treatment of their beards, appear to 
have taken place in the age of the later Semitic kings of Kish and the kings 
of Akkad, and may well have been due to their influence. The use of 
sandals was cei-tainly introduced by the Semites of this period. 


example M'liich he selected to illustrate his thesis, the 
god of the central sluine oi Nippur, has since been 
proved never to ha\ e borne the Semitic name of Bel, 
but to have been known under his Sumerian title of 
Enlil from tlie beginning.^ Tt is true that Professor 
JMeyer claims tliat this point does not affect his main 
argument ; ^ but at least it proves that Nippur was 
always a Sumerian religious centre, and its recognition 
as the central and most important shrine in the country 
by Semites and Sumerians alike, tells against any theory 
requiring a comparatively late date for its foundation. 

Such evidence as we possess from the linguistic side 
is also not in favour of the view which would regard 
the Semites as in occupation of the whole of Babylonia 
before the Sumerian immigration. If that had been 
the case we should naturally expect to find abundant 
traces of Semitic influence in the earliest Sumerian 
texts that have been recovered. But, as a matter of 
fact, no Semitism occurs in any text from Ur-Nina's 
period to that of Lugal-zaggisi with the single excep- 
tion of a Semitic loan-word on the Cone of Entemena.' 
In spite of the scanty natm-e of our material, this fact 
distinctly militates against the assumption that Semites 
and Sumerians were living side by side in Sumer at the 
time.* But the occurrence of the Semitic word in 
Entemena's inscription proves that external contact 
with some Semitic people had already taken place. 
Moreover, it is possible to press the argument from the 
purely linguistic side too far. A date-formula of 
Samsu-iluna's reign has proved that the Semitic speech 
of Babylonia was known as " Akkadian," ^ and it has 

' See Clay, "The Ainer. Journ. of Semit. Lang, and Lit," XXIIL, 
pp. 269 ff. In later periods tlie name was pronounced as EUil. 

2 Cf. "Xachtriige zur aeijyptischen Chronologie/' p. 44 f,, and '^'^Geschichte 
des Altertums," Bd. L, Hft. IL, p. 407. 

3 See Thureau-Dangin, "Sum. und Akkad. Konigsinschriften," p. 38, 
Col. L, 1. 20 ; the word is dam-klui ra, whirh he rightly takes as the equiva- 
lent of the Semitic tamkhura, " battle " (cf. also IJngnad^ " Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 
1008, col. 03 f.). 

* In this respect the early Sumerian texts are in striking contrast to those 
of the later periods ; the evidence of strong Semitic influence in the latter 
formed the main argunioiit on which M. HaUvy and his followers relied to 
disprove the e.xistence of the Sumerians. 

5 See Messerschmidt, " Orient. Lit.-Zeit./' 1905, col. 268 «. ; and cf. 
King, " Chronicles," I., p. 180, n. 3. 





/« i/ic Loin-iY : Dec. ,» Clinlii., pi. 23. 


therefore been argued that tlie first appearance of 
Semitic speech in the country must date from the 
estabhshment of Shar-Gani-sharri's empire with its 
capital at Akkad.^ But there is httle doubt that the 
Semitic kingdom of Kish, represented by the reigns of 
Sharru-Gi, JNIanishtusu and Urumush, was anterior to 
Sargon's empire,^ and, long before the rise of Kish, the 
town of Akkad may m'cII have been the first important 
centre of Semitic settlement in the north. 

It would thus appear that at the earliest period of 
which remains or records liave been recovered, Semites 
and Sumerians were both settled in Babylonia, the one 
race in the north, the other southwards nearer the 
Persian Gulf. Living at first in comparative isolation, 
trade and war would gradually bring them into closer 
contact. Whether we may regard the earliest rulers of 
Kish as Semites like their later successors, is still in 
doubt. The character of Enbi-Ishtar's name points to 
his being a Semite ; but the still earlier king of Kish, 
who is referred to on the Stele of the Vultures, is repre- 
sented on that monument as a Sumerian with shaven 
head and face.^ But this may have been due to a con- 
vention in the sculpture of the time, and it is quite 
possible that Mesilim and his successors were Semites, 
and that their relations with the contemporary rulers of 
Lagash represent the earUer stages in a racial conflict 
which dominates the history of the later periods. 

Of the original home of the Sumerians, from which 
they came to the fertile plains of Southern Babylonia, 
it is impossible to speak with confidence. The fact 
that they settled at the mouths of the great rivers has 
led to the suggestion that they arrived by sea, and this 
has been connected with the story in Berossus of 
Oannes and the other fish-men, who came up from the 
Erythraean Sea and brought religion and culture with 
them. But the legend need not bear this interpreta- 
tion ; it merely points to the Sea-country on the shores 
of the Gulf as the earliest centre of Sumerian culture in 
the land. Others have argued that they came from a 
mountain-home, and have cited in support of their view 

> See Ungnad, op. cit., 1908, col. 62 ff. 2 See below, Chap. VI I. f. 

3 See belou-, p. 141, Kig. 48. 


tlie institution of the zi^j^frurat or temple-tower, built 
'• like a mountain," and the f:m])loyment of the same 
ideogram for "mountain" and for "land." Ikit the 
massive tcmplc-towcr appears to date from the period 
of Gudea and the earlier kings of Ur, and, with the 
single exception of NijDpiir, was probably not a cha- 
raeteristie feature of the earlier temples ; and it is now 
known tliat tlie ideogram for " land " and " mountain " 
was employed in the earlier periods for foreign lands, in 
contrachstinetion to that of the Sumerians tliemselves.^ 
l?ut, in spite of the unsoundness of these arguments, it 
is most probable that the Sumerians did descend on 
Babylonia from the mountains on the east. Their 
entrance into tlie country would thus have been the 
first of several immigrations from that quarter, due to 
climatic and physical changes in Central Asia.'^ 

Still more obscure is the problem of their racial 
affinity. The obliquely set eyes of the figures in the 
earlier reliefs, due mainly to an ignorance of perspective 
characteristic of all primitive art, first suggested the 
theory that the Sumerians were of IMongol type ; and 
the further developments of this view, according to 
which a Chinese origin is to be sought both for 
Sumerian roots and for the cuneiform character, are 
too improbable to need detailed refutation. A more 
recent suggestion, that their language is of Indo- 
European origin and structure,^ is scarcely less im- 
probable, while resemblances wliich have been pointed 
out between isolated words in Sumerian and in 
Armenian, Tm-kish, and other languages of Western 
Asia, may well be fortuitous. AA^'ith the Elamites upon 
their eastern border the Sumerians had close relations 
from the first, Init the two races do not appear to 
be related either in language or by physical character- 
istics. The scientific study of the Sumerian tongue, 

* See above, p. 14, n. 1. ^ ggg further. Appendix I. 

3 Q{ Ijnigihrn, " Ribylouiaca," I., pp. 225 f., 230, 2«4 ft'., II., p. 99 f. 
Tlie grounds, upon •which the sufrgcstion has been put forward^ consist of a 
comparison between the verb "to go" in Sumerian, Greek, and Latin, an 
apparent resembhincc in a few other roots, tlie existence of compound verbs 
ill iSunierian, and tlie like ; but (juite apart from questions of general 
probability, the "parallelisms" noted are scarcely numerous enough, or 
sufficiently close, to justify the inference drawn fi-oni tliem. 



inaugurated by Professors Ziininern and Jensen, and 
more especially by the work of M. Thureau-Dangin 
on the early texts, will doubtless lead in time to more 
accurate knowledge on this subject ; but, until the 
phonetic elements of the language are firmly estab- 
lished, all theories based upon linguistic compari,sons 
are necessarily insecure. 

In view of the absence of Semitic influence in 
Sumer during the earlier periods, it may be conjectured 
that the Semitic immigrants did not reach Babylonia 
from the south, but from the north-west, after travers- 
ing the Syrian coast-lands. This first great influx of 
Semitic nomad tribes left colonists behind them in 
that region, who afterwards as the Amurru, or 
Western Semites, pressed on in their turn into 
Babylonia and established the earliest independent 
dynasty in Babylon. The original movement con- 
tinued into Xorthern Babylonia, and its representatives 
in history were the early Semitic kings of Kish and 
Akkad. But the movement did not stop there ; it 
passed on to the foot of the Zagros hills, and left its 
traces in the independent principalities of Lulubu and 
Gutiu. Such in outline appears to have been the 
course of this early migratory movement, which, after 
colonizing the areas through which it passed, eventually 
expended itself in the western mountains of Persia. It 
was mainly through contact with the higher culture of 
the Sumerians that the tribes which settled in Akkad 
were enabled later on to play so important a part in 
the history of Western ^Vsia. 




CN^ONSTDERABLE changes have recently taken 
place in our estimate of tlie age of Sumerian 
^ civilization, and the length of time which elapsed 
between the earliest remains that have been recovered 
and the foundation of the Babylonian monarchy. It 
was formerly the custom to assign very remote dates 
to the earlier rulers of Sumer and Akkad, and although 
the chronological systems in vogue necessitated enor- 
mous gaps in our knowledge of history, it was con- 
fidently assumed that these would be filled as a result 
of future excavation. Blank periods of a thousand 
years or more were treated as of little account by many 
v/riters. The hoary antiquity ascril^ed to the earliest 
rulers had in itself an attraction which outweighed the 
inconvenience of spreading the historical material to 
cover so immense a space in time. But excavation, so 
far from filling the gaps, has tended distinctly to reduce 
them, and the chronological systems of the later 
Assyrian and Babylonian scribes, which were formerly 
regarded as of primary importance, have been brought 
into discredit by the scribes themselves. From their 
own discrepancies it has been shown that the native 
chronologists could make mistakes in their reckoning, 
and a possible source of error has been disclosed in the 
fact that some of the early dynasties, which were 
formerly regarded as consecutive, were, actually, con- 
temporaneous. Recent research on this subject has 
thus resulted in a considerable reduction of the early 
dates, and the different epoclis in the history of Sumer 
and Akkad, which were at one time treated as isolated 
plienomena, have been articulated to form a consistent 



whole. But the tendency now is to cany the reaction 
rather too far, and to compress certain periods beyond 
the hmits of the evidence. It will be well to summarize 
the problems at issue, and to indicate the point at 
which evidence gives place to conjecture. 

In attempting to set limits to the earlier periods of 
Sumerian history, it is still impossible to do more than 
form a rough and approximate estimate of their duration. 
For in dealing with the chronology of the remoter ages, 
we are, to a great extent, groping in the dark. 'J'he 
material that has been employed for settling the order 
of the early kings, and for determining their periods, 
falls naturally into tiiree main classes. The most im- 
portant of our sources of information consists of the 
contemporary inscriptions of the early kings themselves, 
which have been recovered upon the sites of the ancient 
cities in Babylonia.^ The inscriptions frequently give 
genealogies of the rulers whose achievements they 
record, and they thus enable us to ascertain the sequence 
of the kings and the relative dates at which they 
reigned. This class of evidence also makes it possible 
to tix certain points of contact between the separate 
lines of rulers who maintained an independent authority 
within the borders of their city-states. 

A second class of material, which is of even greater 
importance for settling the chronology of tlie later 
Sumerian epoch, comprises the chronological docu- 
ments drawn up by early scribes, who incorporated in 
the form of lists and tables the history of their own 
time and that of their predecessors. The system of 
dating documents -which was in vogue was not a very 
convenient one from the point of view of those who 
used it, but it has furnished us with an invaluable 
summary of the principal events which took place for 
long periods at a time. The early dwellers in Babylonia 
did not reckon dates by the years of the reigning king, 
as did the later Babylonians, but they cited each year 

^ These have beaa collected and translated by Thureau-Dangin in " Les 
Inscriptions de Sumer et d'Akkad," the German edition of whicii, published 
under the title " Die sumerischen und akkadischon Konigsinschriften " in 
the Vorderasiathche Bibliothek, includes the autlior's corrections and an 
introduction ; a glossary to subjects of a religious character, compiled by 
Langdon, is added to the German edition of the work. 


by the event of greatest importance which took place in 
it. Such events consisted in the main of the building 
of temples, the performance of religious ceremonies, and 
the conquest of neighbouring cities and states. Thus the 
dates u])on private and oflicial documents often furnish 
us with historical intbrmation of considerable importance. 

But the disadvantages of the system are obvious, for 
an event might appear of great importance in one city 
and mii^ht be of no interest to another situated at some 
distance from it. Thus it happened that the same 
event was not employed throughout the whole country 
for designating a particular year, and we have evidence 
that diflerent systems of dating were employed in 
different cities. JNIoreover, it would have required an 
unusually good memory to fix the exact period of a 
document by a single reference to an event which took 
place in the year when it was draAvn up, more especially 
after the system had been in use for a considerable 
time. Tims, in order to fix the relative dates of docu- 
ments without delay, the scribes compiled lists of the 
titles of the years, arranged in order under the reigns 
of the successive kings, and these were doubtless 
stored in some archive-chamber, where they were easily 
accessible in the case of any dispute arising with regard 
to the date of a particular year. It is fortunate that 
some of these early Sumerian date-lists have been 
recovered, and we are furnished by them with an out- 
line of Sumerian history, which has the value of a 
contemporary record.^ They have thrown light upon 
a period of which at one time we knew little, and they 
have served to remove more than one erroneous sup- 
position. Thus the so-called Second Dynasty of Ur 
was proved by them to have been non-existent, and the 
consequent reduplication of kings bearing the names 
of Ur-Engur and Dungi was shown to have had no 
foundation in fact. 

From the compilation of lists of the separate years 
it was but a step to the classification of the reigns of 
the kings themselves and their arrangement in the form 

' Cf. Tliureau-Dang-in, " Konigsinschriften/' pp. 228 ff., where the lists 
are restored from dates on early tablets ; for the earlier date-formulae from 
tablets, see pp. 224 ff. 


of dynasties. Among the mass of tablets recovered 
from Niffer has been found a fragment of one of these 
early dynastic tablets/ which supplements the date- 
lists and is of the greatest value for setthng the 
chronology of the later period. The reverse of the 
tablet gives complete lists of the names of the kings 
who formed the Dynasties of Ur and Isin, together 
with notes as to the length of their respective reigns, 
and it further states that the Dynasty of Isin directly 
succeeded that of Ur. This document fixes once for 
all the length of the period to which it refers, and it is 
much to be regretted that so little of the text has been 
recovered. Our information is at present confined to 
what is legible on part of one column of the tablet. 
But the text in its complete form must have contained 
no less than six columns of writing, and it probably 
gave a list of various dynasties which ruled in Babylonia 
from the very earliest times down to the date of its 
compilation, though many of the dynasties enumerated 
were doubtless contemporaneous. It was on the base 
of such documents as this dynastic list that the famous 
dynastic tablet was compiled for the library of Ashur- 
bani-pal at Nineveh, and the existence of such lengthy 
dynastic records must have contributed to the exagge- 
rated estimate for the beginnings of Babylonian history 
which have come down to us from the work of Berossus. 
A third class of material for settling the chronology 
has been found in the external evidence afforded by the 
early historical and votive inscriptions to which reference 
has already been made, and by tablets of accounts, 
deeds of sale, and numerous documents of a connnercial 
and agricultural character. From a study of their form 
and material, the general style of the writing, and the 
nature of the characters employed, a rough estimate 
may sometimes be made as to the time at which a 
particular record was inscribed, or the length of a period 
covered by documents of different reigns. Further, in 
the course of the excavations undertaken at any site, 
careful note may be made of the relative depths of the 
strata in which hiscriptions have been found. Thus, if 

1 See Hilprecht, "Mathematical, Metrological, and Chronological 
Tablets/' p. 4G i\, pi. 30, No. 47. 


texts of certain kings occur in a moinid at a greater 
dcptli than those of other rulers, and it appears from an 
examination of the eartli that the mound has not heen 
disturhed hy subsequent building operations or by 
natural causes, it may be inferred that the deeper the 
stratum in whicli a text is found the earlier must be the 
date to be assigned to it. But this class of evidence, 
M-hethcr obtained from pahicographical study or from 
systematic excavation, is sometimes uncertain and liable 
to more than one interpretation. In such cases it may 
only be safely employed when it agrees with other and 
independent considerations, and where additional sup- 
port is not forthcoming, it is wiser to regard conclusions 
based upon it as provisional. 

The three classes of evidence that have been referred 
to in the preceding paragraphs enable us to settle the 
relative order of many of the early rulers of Babylonia, 
but they do not supply us with any definite date by 
means of which the clu'onology of these earlier ages 
may be brought into relation with that of the later 
periods of Babylonian history. In order to secure such 
a point of connection, reliance has in the past been 
placed upon a notice of one of the early rulers of 
Babylonia, which occurs in an inscription of the last 
king of the Xeo-Babylonian empire. On a clay cylinder 
of Xabonidus, which is preserved in the British Museum, 
it is stated that (3200 years elapsed between the burial 
of Narilm-Sin's foundation-memorial in the temple of 
the Sun-god at Sippar, and the finding of the memorial 
by Xabonidus himself when digging in the temple's 
foundations.^ Now NaramSin was an early king of 
Ak kad, and, according to later tradition, was the son of 
the still more famous Sargon I. On the strengtli of the 
figure given by Nabonidus, the approximate date of 
.'3750 B.C. has been assigned to Naram-Sin, and that of 
3800 B.C. to his father Sargon ; and mainly on the basis 
of these early dates the beginning of Sumerian history 
has been set back as far as 5000 and even 6000 b.c.^ 

> Cf. "Cun. luscr. West. Asia," V., pi. 64, Col. II., 11. 54-65. 

^ Ililprccht formerly placed the foundiiip' of Kiilil's temple and the first 
settlement at Nippur " somewhere between GOOO and 7000 B.r. , possihly even 
earlier" (cf. "Old Babylonian Inscriptions chiefly from Nippur," I't. II., 
p. 24). 


The improbably liigh estimate of Nabonidus for 
the date of Naram-Sin has long been the subject of 
criticism/ It is an entirely isolated statement, un- 
supported by any other reference in early or late texts ; 
and the scribes who were responsible for it were clearly 
not anxious to diminish the antiquity of the foundation- 
record, which had been found at such a depth below the 
later temple's foundations, and after so prolonged a 
search. To accept it as accurate entailed the leaving 
of enormous gaps in the chronological scliemes, even 
when postulating the highest possible dates for the 
dynasties of Ur and Babylon. An alternative device 
of partially filling the gaps by the invention of kings 
and even dynasties " was not a success, as their existence 
has since been definitely disproved. Moreover, the 
recent reduction in the date of the First Dynasty of 
Babylon, necessitated by the proof that the first three 
dynasties of the Kings' List were partly contempor- 
aneous, made its discrepancy with Nabonidus's figures 
still more glaring, while at the same time it furnished a 
possible explanation of so high a figure resulting from 
his calculations. For his scribes in all good faith may 
have reckoned as consecutive a number of early 
dynasties which had been contemporaneous.^ The 
final disproof of the figure is furnished by evidence of 
an archaeological and epigraphic character. No such 
long interval as twelve or thirteen hundred years can 
have separated the art of Gudea's period from that of 
Naram-Sin ; and the clay tablets of the two epochs 
differ so little in shape, and in the forms of the characters 
with which they are inscribed, that we must regard the 

' See Lehniaiin-IIaupt, "Zwei Hauptprobleme/' pp. 172 fF., and Winckler, 
*' Forscliuno:en ," I., p. 54!) ; " Die Keiliiischriften uiid das Alte Testament "' 
(.3rd ed.), L, p. M f., and " iMitteil. der Vorderas. Gesellscliaft," 1900, I., p. 12, 
n. 1 ; cf. also Thureau-Dangin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," IV., p. 72, and " Rec. de 
tabl.," p. ix. 

2 Cf. Radau, " Early Babylonian History," pp. 30 ff., 21.5 ff. 

' Cf. KinjT^ ''Chroiiicles," I., p. IG. This explanation is preferable to 
Lchmann-Haupt's emendation of the figures, by which he sujr^ests that a 
thousand years were added to it by a scribal error. The principle of emend- 
ing the figures in these later chronological references is totally unscientific. 
For the emenders, while postulating mechanical errors in the writing of the 
figures, still regard the calculations of the native scribes as above reproach ; 
whereas many of their figures, which are incapable of emendation, are 
inconsistent with each other. 


two ages as iinniediately following one another without 
any considerable break. 

By rejecting the figures of Nabonidus we cut away 
our only external connection with the chronology of 
the later periods, and, in order to evolve a scheme for 
earlier times we ha\'e to fall back on a process of 
reckonin<j from below. AVithout discussino; in detail 
the later chronology, it will be well to indicate briefly 
the foundations on which w^e can begin to build. By 
the aid of the I'tolemaic Canon, whose accuracy is 
confirmed by the larger List of Kings and the principal 
liabylonian Chronicle, the later chronology of Babylon 
is definitely fixed back to the year 747 b.c. ; by means 
of the eponym lists that for Assyria is fixed back to the 
year 911 B.C. Each scheme controls and confirms the 
other, and the solar eclipse of June 1.5th, 703 B.C., which 
is recorded in the eponymy of Pur-Sagale, places the 
dead reckoning for these later periods upon an absolutely 
certain basis. For the earlier periods of Babylonian 
history, as far back as the foundation of the Babylonian 
monarchy, a chronological framework has been supplied 
by the principal List of Kings. ^ In spite of gaps in 
the text which render the lengths of Dynasties IV. 
and VIII. uncertain, it is possible, mainly by the help 
of synchronisms between Assyrian and Babylonian 
kings, to fix approximately the date of Dynasty III. 
Some difference of opinion exists with regard to this 
date, but the beginning of the dynasty may be placed 
at about the middle of the eighteenth century B.C. 

With regard to Dynasty II. of the King's List it is 
now known that it ruled in the Sea-country in the 
region of the Persian Gulf, its earlier kings being con- 
temporary with the close of Dynasty I. and its later 
ones with the early part of Dynasty 1 11.^ Here we 
come to the first of two points on which there is a 
considerable diifcrcnee of opinion. The available 
evidence suggests that the kings of the Sea-country 
never ruled in Babylon, and that the Third, or Kassite, 
Dynasty followed the First Dynasty of Babylon with- 
out any considerable break.^ But the date 2232 B.C., 

' For references, see King, " Clironicles," I., p. 77. n. 1. - Op. ci(., pp. 9'] ff. 
' Op. cit., Chap. I\'. f. Meyer also adopts this view (" Gescliichle des 
Altertums," Hd. I., lift. II., p. 340 f.). 






which probably represents the beginning of the non- 
mythical dynasties of Berossus,^ has hitherto played a 
considerable part in modern schemes of chronology, 
and, in spite of the fact that no amount of ingenuity 
can reconcile his dynasties with those of history, there 
is still a strong temptation to retain the date for the 
beginning of Dynasty I. of the Kings' l^ist as affording 
a fixed and certain point from which to start calcula- 
tions. But this can only be done by assuming that 
some of the kings of the Sea-country ruled over the 
whole of Babylonia, an assumption that is negatived by 
such historical and archaeological evidence as we possess.^ 
It is safer to treat the date 2232 B.C. as without signi- 
ficance, and to follow the evidence in confining the 
kings of the Sea-country to their own land. If we do 
this we obtain a date for the foundation of the Baby- 
lonian monarchy about the middle of the twenty-first 
century b.c. 

The second important point on which opinion is not 
agreed, concerns the relation of the First Dynasty of 
Babylon to that of I sin. From the Nippur dynastic 
list we know the duration of the dynasties of Ur and 
Isin, and if we could connect the latter with the First 
Dynasty of Babylon, we should be able to carry a fixed 
chronology at least as far back as the age of Gudea. 
Such a point of connection has been suggested in the 
date-formula for the seventeenth year of Sin-muballit's 
reign, which records a capture of Isin ; and by identify- 
ing this event with the fall of the dynasty, it is assumed 

1 Cf. '^ Chronicles," L, pp. 90 ff. 

2 The purely arbitrary cliaracter of the assumption is well illustrated by 
the different results obtained by tliose who make it. By clinging- to Berossus's 
date of 2232 b.c, Thureau-Dangin assigns to the second dynasty of the Kings' 
List a period of 1G8 years of independent rule in Babylon (cf. " Zeits. fiir 
Assyr./' XXl., pp. ITGff., and "Journal des savants," 1908, pp. 190 ff.), and 
Ungnad 177 years ("Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1907, col. (538, 1908, col. G3 ff.). 
Lehmann-Haupt, in his suggested reconciliation of the new data with his 
former emendation of tlie Bavian date, makes the period 80 years (" Klio," 
1908, pp. 227 ff.). Poebel, ignoring Berossus and attempting to reconcile tlio 
native chronological notices to early kings, makes it 100 years (cf. "Zeits. 
fiir Assyr.," XXI., pp. 1(52 ff.). The latest combination is that proposed by 
Schuabel, who accepts the date of 2232 b.c. for both the system of Berossus 
and that represented by the Kings' List, but places the historical beginning 
of the First Dynasty in 2172 b.c. ; this necessitates a gap of 120 years 
between Dynasties I. and III. (" Mitteil. der Vorderas. Gesellschaft," 1908, 
pp. 241 ff.). But all these systems are mainly based on a manipulation of 
the figures, and completely ignore the archaeological evidence. 


that tlie kings of I sin and of Babylon overlapped for a 
period of about ninety-nine years. In a later ehapter 
the evidence is discussed on ^vllich this theory rests, and 
it is shown that the capture of Isin in Sin-niuballit's 
seventeenth year had nothing to do with the dynasty of 
that name, but was an episode in the later struggle 
between Babylon and I^arsa.^ M^g thus have no means 
of deciding what interval, if any, separated the two 
dynasties from one another, and consequently all the 
earlier dates remain only approximate. 

The contract-tablets dating from the period of the 
Dynasty of Isin, which have been found at Nippur, 
are said to resemble closely those of the First Babylonian 
Dynasty in form, material, writing, and terminology."^ 
It would thus appear that no long interval separated 
the two dynasties from one another. We have seen 
that the foundation of the Babylonian monarchy may 
be set in about the middle of the twenty-first century 
B.C., and by placing the end of the Dynasty of Isin 
within the first half of that same century w^e obtain the 
approximate dates of 2300 B.C. for the Dynasty of Isin, 
and 2400 B.C. for the Dynasty of Ur. It is true that we 
know that the Dynasty of Ur lasted for exactly one 
hundred and seventeen years, and that of Isin for two 
hundred and twenty-five years and a half, but until we 
can definitely connect the Dynasty of Isin with that of 
Babylon, any attempt to work out the dates in detail 
would be misleading. We must be content to await 
the recovery of new material, and meanwhile to think 
in periods. 

There is evidence that Ur-Ens^ur estabhshed his 
rule in Ur, and founded his dynasty in the time of Ur- 
Ningirsu, the son of Gudea of Lagash. We may 
therefore place Gudea's accession at about 2450 B.C. 
This date is some thirteen hundred years later than 
tliat assigned to Naram-Sin by Nabonidus. But the 
latter, we have already seen, must be reduced, in accord- 
ance with evidence furnished by Tello tablets, which 
are dated in the reigns of the intermediate patesis of 
Lagash. If we set this interval at one hundred and 

' See below, Cliap. XI., pp. 313 ff. 

« Cf. Hilprecht, "Matli., Met., and Chrou. Tabl.," p. 56, n. 1. 


fifty years,^ we obtain for Naram-Sin a date of 2000 
B.C., and for Shar-Gani-Sliarri one of 20.50 b.c. For 
the later Semitic kings of Kish, headed by Sharru-Gi, 
one hundred years is not too much to allow ; ^ we thus 
obtain for Sharru-Gi the approximate date of 2750 B.C. 
It is possible that JNIanishtusu, King of Kish, was 
the contemporary of Urukagina of Lagash, but the 
evidence in favour of the synchronism is not sufficiently 
strong to justify its acceptance.^ By placing Urukagina 
at 2800 B.C., we obtain for Ur-Nina an approximate date 
of 3000 B.C., and for still earlier rulers such as Mesilim, a 
date rather earlier than this.* It is difficult to estimate 
the age of the early graves, cylinder-seals and tablets 
found at Fara, but they cannot be placed at a much 
later period than 3400 B.C. Thus the age of Sumerian 
civilization can be traced in Babylonia back to about 
the middle of the fourth millennium B.C., but not beyond. 
It must be confessed that this is a reduction in the 
date usually assigned to the earliest relics that have 
been recovered of the Sumerian civilization, but its 
achievements are by no means belittled by the com- 
pression of its period of development. It is not 
suggested that this date marks the beginning of 
Sumerian culture, for, as we have noted, it is jDrobable 
that the race was already possessed of a high standard 
of civilization on their arrival in Babylonia. The inven- 
tion of cuneiform writing, which was one of their most 
noteworthy achie\'ements, had already taken place, for 
the characters in the earliest inscriptions recovered have 
lost their pictorial form. Assuming the genuineness of 
the " Blau JNIonuments," it must be admitted that even 
on them the characters are in a comparatively advanced 
stage of development.-' We may thus put back into a 

* Thureau-Dangiu would assign only one hundred years to tliis period (cf. 
*' Journal des savants," 1908, p. 201). 

2 The period may well have been longer, especially if Manishtusu should 
prove to have been t)ie contemporary of Urukagina. 
^ See below, pp. 17(), n. 2, 209 f. 

* For a list of the kings and rulers of Sunicr and Akkad witli their 
approximate dates, see the List of Rulers at the end of the volume. 

° See the plate opposite p. 02. Tlie objects have been previously pub- 
lished by Hayes Ward in " Proc. Anier. Orient. Soc," Oct.; 1H8.J, and 
"Amer. Journ. Arch.," vol. iv. (1888), pp. 39 ff. Tliey subsequently found 
their way into a London .sale-room, where tliey were bought as forgeries and 
presented as such to the British Museum. 



more remote age the origin and early growth of 
Sunierian culture, Avhicli took place at a time when it 
was not Suinerian. 

In the concluding chapter of this volume an 
estimate is given to the extent to which Sumerian 
culture influenced, either directly or indirectly, other 
races in Asia, Egypt, and the West. In such matters 
the interest attaching to the Sumerian original is 
largely derived from its effects, and its study may 
be undertaken mainly with the view of elucidating a 
later development. But one department of Sumerian 
activity forms a striking exception to this rule. The 
arts of sculpture and engravmg, as practised by the 
Sumerians, are well "worthy of study on their own 
account, for while their work in all periods is marked 
by spirit and originality, that of the later time reaches 
a remarkable standard of excellence. The improve- 
ment in technique observable in the later period may 
largely be due to the influence of Semitic work, which 
was derived from Sumer and reacted in its turn on the 
parent stem. But the original impulse to artistic 
production was of purely Sumerian origin, and it is 
possible to trace the gradual development of its 
products from the rudest reliefs of the archaic period 
to the finished sculpture of Gudea's reign.^ The 
character of the Semitic art of Akkad was secondary 
and derivative, though the Semites certainly improved 
on what they borrowed ; in that of the Sumerians the 
seeds of its later excellence may be detected from the 
beginning. The most ancient of the sculptured reliei's 
of the Sumerians are very rudely cut, and their age is 
attested not only by their primitive character, but also 
by the linear form of the writing which is found upon 

^ Our knowledge of Sunierian art is mainly derived from the finds at 
Tello^ since the objects from otlier early sites are not yet published. For its 
best and fullest discussion, see Ileuzey's descriptions in " Dccouvertcs en 
Chald^e," his " Catalo;Ljue des antiquites chald(?ennes," " Una Villa royalc 
chaldeenne," and the " llevue d'Assyrioloffie " ; cf. also Perrot and Chipicz, 
" Ilistoire de I'art," vol. ii. The finest examples of Semitic art have been 
found at Susa (.see De Morgan, " Mcinoires de la Delt^gation en Perse," 
pasifi7)i). A scientific treatment of the subject is adopted by Meyer in 
"Sumerier und Semiten," but he is inclined to a.<>ign too much credit to the 
Semite, and to overestimate his share in the artistic development of the two 



/// f/iL- L(>u7»-i'; Dec. en Chnlii.. pi. 14. 


them. These, owing to their smaller size, are the best 
preserved, for the later reliefs, whieh belong to the 
period when Simierian art reached its fullest develop- 
ment, are unfortimately represented only by fragments. 
But they suffice to show the spirit which animated 
tjiese ancient craftsmen, and enabled them successfully 
to overcome difficulties of technique which were care- 
fully avoided by the later sculptors of Assyria. To 
take a single instance, we may note the manner in 
which they represented the heads of the principal 
figures of a composition in full-face, and did not seek 
to avoid the difficulty of foreshortening the features by 
a monotonous arrangement in profile. A good example 
of their bolder method of composition is afforded by 
the relief of a god, generally identified with Ningirsu, 
which dates from the epoch of Gudea ; he is seated 
upon a throne, and while the torso and bearded head 
are sculptured full-face, the legs are in profile.^ On 
another fragment of a relief of the same period, 
beautifully cut in alabaster but much damaged by 
fire, a goddess is represented seated on the knees of 
a god. The rendering of the group is very spirited, 
for while the god gazes in profile at his wife, she looks 
out from the sculpture curving her body from the 

In neither instance can it be said that the sculptor 
has completely succeeded in portraying a natural 
attitude, for the head in each case should be only 
in three-quarter profile, but such attempts at an un- 
conventional treatment afford striking evidence of 
the originality which characterized the w^ork of the 
Sumerians. Both the sculptures referred to date 
from the later Sumerian period, and, if they were 
the only instances recovered, it might be urged that 
the innovation should be traced to the influence of 
North Babylonian art under the patronage of the 
kings of Akkad. Fortunately, however, we possess 
an interesting example of the same class of treatment, 
which undoubtedly dates from a period anterior to the 

J See below, p. 2G7, Fig. GfJ. 

"See the photographic reproduction in "Dec. en ChaldeCj" pi. 22, 
Fig. 5. 


Semitic domination. Tliis is afforded by a perforated 
plaque, somewhat similar to tlie more ])rimiti\'e ones 
of Ur-Nina/ engraved in shallow relief with a libation- 
scene. The figure of a man, com])letely nude and wdth 
shaven head and face, raises a libation-vase with a long 
spout, from which he is about to pour water into a vase 
holding two palm leaves and a flowering branch.^ The 
goddess in whose honour the rite is being performed is 
seated in the mountains, represented as in later times 
by a nimiber of small lozenges or half circles. AV^hile 

her feet and knees are in pro- 
file, the head is represented 
full-face, and the sculptor's 
"vvant of skill in this novel 
treatment has led him to 
assiijn the head a size out of 
/ 0.' -^—."k T- ) ^11 proportion to the rest 

^ of the body. The effect is 

almost grotesque, but the 
work is of considerable in- 
terest as one of the earliest 
attempts on the part of the 
Sumerian sculptors to break 
away from the stiff and for- 
mal traditions of the archaic 
period. From the general 
style of the work the relief 
may probably be dated about 
the period of Eannatum's reign. 

The Sumerians did not attain the decorative effect 
of the Assyrian bas-reliefs with which the later kings 
lined the walls of their palaces. In fact, the small size 
of the figures rendered them suitable for the enrichment 
of stelae, plaques, basins and stone \'ases, rather than for 
elaborate w^all sculptures, for which in any case they 
had not the material. The largest fragment of an early 
bas-relief that has been recovered appears to have 

^ For the use of tliese perforated sculptures, sec below, p. 110 f. 

^ llie rite is represented upon other Suuieriau moMunieiits such as Iho 
Stele of the \*ultures (see below, p. 140). Heuzey sug-i,rests that tlie liturgy 
may have forbidden the loss of tlie libation-water, the rite symbolizing- its use 
for the profit of vegetation; cf. "Catalogue des aiitiquitcs chalde'eunes," 
p. 118. 

Fig. 20. 

Perforated plaque engraved with a 
scene representing the pouring out 
of a libation before a goddess. 

[In the Louvre ; Cat. No. 11.] 



formed the angle of a stone pedestal, and is decorated 
with figures in several registers representing ceremonies 
of Sumerian worship.^ In the upper register on the 
side that is best preserved is a priest leading worshippers 
into the presence of a god, while below is a crouching 
figure, probably that of a woman who plays on a great 
lyre or harp of eleven cords, furnished with two up- 
rights and decorated with a horned head and the figure 
of a bull. On the side in the upper row is a heavily 
bearded figure on a larger scale than the rest, and tlie 
mixture of Sumerian and Semitic types in the figures 
preceding him suggests that the monument is to be 
assigned to the period of Semitic domination, under the 
rule of the kings of Kish or Akkad. But it is obviously 
Sumerian in character, resembling the work of Gudea's 
period rather than that of Naram-Sin. 

Fig. 21. 

Fragments of sculpture belonging to the best period of Sumerian art. 
[Dt'c, pi. 25, Figs. 4 and 6.] 

The perfection of detail which characterized the 
best work of the Sumerian sculptors is well illustrated 
by two fragments of reliefs, parts of which are drawn in 
outline in the accompanying blocks. The one on the 
left is from a bas-relief representing a line of humped 
cattle and horned sheep defiling past the spectator. It 
is badly broken, but enough is preserved to show the 
surprising fidehty with wliich the sculptor has repro- 
duced the animal's form and attitude. Though the 
subject recalls the lines of domestic animals upon tlie 

' See the plate opposite p. 52. 


Assyrian bas-reliefs, the Siimerian treatment is infinitely 
superior. The same liigh qualities of design and work- 
manship are visible in tlie little fragment on tlie riglit. 
Of the main sculptm'e only a human foot remains ; but 
it is beautifully modelled. The decorative border 
below the foot represents the spouting vase with its 
two streams of water and two fisli swimming against 
the stream. A plant rises from the vase between the 
streams, the symbol of vegetation nouri^>hed by the 
waters.^ The extreme delicacy of the original shows to 
what degree of perfection Sumerian work attained 
during the best period. 

The use of sculpture in relief was also most happily 

employed for the decoration 
of basins or fountains. The 
most elaborate of those re- 
covered, unhappily repre- 
sented by mutilated fragments 
only, was decorated on the 
outside with a chain of 
female figures passing from 
hand to hand vases of spout- 
ing water. ^ Better preserved 
are the remains of another 
basin, which was set up by 
Gudea in Ningirsu's temple 
at T^agasli. liectangular in 
shape, each corner was deco- 
rated with a lion. The head, 
drawn in the accompanying 
block, is a fine piece of sculptiu*e, and almost stands out 
from the corner, while the body, carved in profile on tlie 
side of the basin, is in low relief. In this portrayal of a 
lion turning its head, the designer has formed a bold 
but decorative combination of relief with sculpture in 
the round. 

The most famous examples of Sumerian sculpture 
are the statues of Gudea, and the rather earlier one of 
Ur-Bau, which, however, lose much of their character 
by the absence of their heads. It is true that a head 

' Cf. Heuzey, " De'c. en Chalde'e," p. 218 ; " Catalogue," p. 149. 
« See "Ddc. en Chald^e," pi. 24, Fig. 4, pp. 216 ff. 

Fig. 22. 

Limef?tone head of a lion which 
decorated the corner of a basin set 
up by Gudea in Ningirsu's temple 
at (Shirpurla). 

\_Dic., pi. 24, Fig. 3.] 



has been fitted to a smaller and more recently found 
figure of Gudea ; ^ but this proves to be out of all 
proportion to the body — a defect that was probably 
absent from the larger statues. The traditional attitude 
of devotion, symbolized by the clasping of the hands 
over the breast, gives them a certain monotony ; but 
their modelling is superior to anytliing achieved by the 
Babylonians and Assyrians of a later time.^ Thus 
there is a complete absence of exaggeration in the 
rendering of the muscles ; the sculptor has not attempted 
by such crude and conventional methods to ascribe to 
his model a supernatural strength and vigour, but has 
worked direct from nature. They are carved in diorite, 
varying in colour from dark 
green to black, and that so 
hard a material should have 
been worked in the large 
masses required, is in itself 
an achievement of no small 
importance, and argues great 
technical skill on the part of 
the sculptors of the later 

For smaller figures and 
statuettes a softer stone, such 
as white limestone, alabaster, 
or onyx, was usually em- 
ployed, but a few in the 
harder stone have been re- 
covered. The most remark- 
able of these is a diorite 
statuette of a woman, the 
upper part of which has been 
preserved. The head and the 
torso were found separately, 
but thanks to their hard material they join without 
leaving a trace of any break. Here, as usual, the hands 
are crossed upon tlie breast, and the folds of the garment 

Fig. 23. 

Upper part of a female statuette 
of diorite, of the period of Gudea or 
a little later. 

[Die, pi. 24 bis, Fig. 2.] 

* See the plate opposite p. 268. 

* For the seated statue of Gudea as the architect of Gatumdug's temple, 
see tlie plate opposite p. G6 ; and for descriptions of the statues, see 
Chap. IX., p. 2GiJ f. 


jireonly indicated under the arms by a few plain grooves 
as in tlie statues of (ludea. ]5ut the woman's form is 
\'isible beneath the stuff' of her garment, and tlie eurves 
of the baek are wonderfully true. Her hair, undulating 
on the temples, is bound in a head-cloth and falls in the 
form of a chignon on the neck, the whole being secured 
by a stiff band, or fillet, around which the cloth is folded 
with its fringe tucked in. 

The drawing in Fig. 23 scarcely does justice to 
the beauty of the face, since it exaggerates the con- 
ventional representation of the eyebrows, and reproduces 

the texture of the stone at the 
expense of the outline. Moreover, 
the face is almost more striking in 
profile.^ The nose, though perfectly 
straight, is rather large, but this is 
clearly a racial characteristic. Even 
so, the type of female beauty por- 
trayed is singularly striking, and the 
manner in which the Sumerian 
sculptor has succeeded in repro- 
FiG. 24. ducing it was not approached in the 

work of any later period. Another 

Limestone head ofai in n i" .^ii -.i 

female statuette belonging head Irom a icmalc statucttc, With 

'lerianarf ^''"°'^ °^ ^''" ^^^^ ^^^^^ drcsscd in a similar fashion, 

[Die, pi. 25, Fig. 2.] is equally beautiful. The absence 

of part of the nose tends to give it 
a rather less marked ethnographic character, and pro- 
bably increases the resemblance which has been claimed 
for it to types of classical antiquity.^ 

The art of casting in metal was also practised by the 
Sumerians, and even in the earliest period, anterior to 
the reign of Ur-Nina, small foundation-figures have been 
discovered, which were cast solid hi copper. In fact, 
copper was the metal most commonly employed by the 
Sumerians, and their stage of culture throughout the 
long period of their history may be described as a 
copper age, rather than an age of bronze. It is true 
tliat the claim is sometimes put forward, based on 

' See tlie very beautiful drawing in outline which Heuzey jirinta on the 
title-page of his Catalogue. 

» Cf. Ileuzey, " Dec. en Chald^e," p. 158. 



1 n 




Brit. Ahis., yn. 2i20.(. 


/>>vV. .Ui/s., iVo. 93477. 


very unsatisfactory evidence, that the Sumerian metal- 
founders used not only tin but also antimony in order 
to harden copper, and at the same time render it more 
fusible ; ^ and it is difficult to explain the employment 
of two ideograms for the metal, even in the earlier 
periods, unless one signified bronze and tlie other 
copper.'' But a careful analysis by M. Berthelot of 
the numerous metal objects found at Tello, the dates of 
which can be definitely ascertained, has shown that, even 
under the later rulers of Lagash and the kings of Ur, 
not only votive figures, but also tools and weapons of 
copper, contain no trace of tin employed as an alloy. ^ 
As at Tello, so at Tell Sifr, the vessels and weapons 
found by I^oftus are of copper, not bronze.* The 

' It plinnl.l be noted that of the seven objects from Nippur and other 
soutli-liabyloiiian sites wliich were submitted to analysis by Ilerr Otto Helm 
in Danzig, only two contained a percentage of tin (cf. '' Zeitschrift fiir 
Kthnologie," I'JOl, pp. 157 ff.)- ^^i these a nail (op. cit., p. 101) is from a 
stratum in Nippur, dated by Prof. Hilprecht himself after 300 a.d. The 
" stilusartige Instrument," whicli, like tlie nail, contained over five per cent, 
of tin, was not found at Nippur, but is said to have come from a mound 
about thirty miles to the south of it. Nothing is therefore known with 
accuracy as to its date. Tlie percentage of antimony in tbe other objects is 
comparatively small, and tlie dates assigned to tliem are not clearly sub- 
stantiated. These facts do not justify Hilprccht's confident statement in 
" Explorations," p. 252. Meyer also credits the earliest Sumerians with 
u.sing liroiize beside copper, and he describes the axe-beads and arm-rings 
found in tlie early graves as of bronze (cf. "Geschichte des Altertums," 
Bd. I., Hft. II., p. 410 f.) ; but he also describes the little foundation-figures 
from the oldest stratum at Tello as of bronze, Avhereas analysis has proved 
them to be copper. 

^ Tbis point is made by Sayce (cf. "The Archaeology of the Cuneiform 
Inscriptions," p. .5!) f.), who, however, holds the definite opinion that nothing 
of bronze has been discovered on the earlier sites {op. cit., p. 55 f.). 

•* Cf. Berthelot, " i^a cliimie au moyen age," tome I., Appendix IX., 
p. 391 f. ; " Introduction k I'e'tude de la chimie," p. 227 f., and Heuzey in 
"Dec. en Chaldee," p. 238 ; antimony is said to have been known and used 
by itself, though not as an alloy (Berthelot, "Iiitrod.," p. 223), but there is 
no proof of the date of the fragment from Tello, which was analysed. It may 
be added that the votive figures of Gudea's reigu, which are preserved in the 
British Museum and are usually regarded as of bronze (cf. the plate opposite 
p. 272), should, since they came from Tello, be more accurately described as 
of copper. 

* See Loftus, " Chaldaea and Susiana," p. 208 f., who describes all the 
objects as of copper. One of the knives excavated by Loftus was subsequently 
analysed and found to be copper (see " Report of the British Assoc," Notting- 
ham, 1893, p. 715) ; this analysis was confirmed by that of Dr. J. II. 
(Gladstone (published in the " Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," vol. xvi., p. 98 f.). 
A careful analysis of the metal objects found by members of tbe Deutsche 
Orient- Gesellschaft at Fara in 1902 and 1903, and styled by them as bronze 
(see " Mitteilutigen," No. 17, p 0), would probably result in proving the 
absence of any alloy. 


presence of an exceedin»Tly small proportion of elements 
other than copper in the objects submitted to analysis 
was probably not intentional, but was due to the neces- 
sarily impert'ect method of smelting that was employed. 
No trace has yet been found of any mould used by 
the Sumerians in the process of casting metal, but we 
may assume that clay was employed both for solid and 
hollow castings. While many figures of the same form 

have been found, no two are exactly 
alike nor of quite the same propor- 
tions, so that it may be inferred that 
a mould was never used a second 
time, but that each was broken in 
order to remove the casting. The 
copper foundation -figures usually 
take the form of nails, terminating 
with the bust of a female figure, and 
they were set in a socket beneath 
stone foundation-inscriptions which 
they support. Later, votive objects, 
cast in copper, represent male figures, 
bearing on their heads the builder's 
basket, in which is clay for the sacred 
bricks of the temple's foundation ; 
or they consist of great cones or 
nails supporting a recumbent bull,^ 
or clasped by the kneeling figure of 
a god.^ Large figures of wood were sometimes covered 
with thin plates of copper joined by a series of small 
nails or rivets, as is proved by the horn of a bull of 
natural size, which has been discovered at Tello.^ But 
hollow castings in copper of a considerable size have 
also been found. A good example is the bull's head, 
figured in the accompanying block, which probably 
dates from a period not later than the close of Ur- 
Nina's dynasty. Its eyes are inlaid with mother-of- 
pearl and lapis-lazuli, and a very similar method of 
inlaying is met with in the copper head of a goat which 
was found at Fara.* 

Fig. 25. 

One of a series of copper 
female foundation-figures 
with supporting rings, 
buried in a structure of 
unburnt brick beneath 
stone foundation-records. 
From Tello ; period of Ur- 

[Die, pi. 2 ter, Fig. 3.] 

' See the blocks on p. 250. ^ See the plate opposite p. 272. 

3 See "D^c. en Chaldee," pi. 45, Fi^. 1. 

* See Fig. 27, and cf. Ililpreclit, " Explorations," p. 53Li f. 



A far simpler process of manufacture was employed 
for the making of votive figures of terra-cotta, which, in 
order of development, preceded the use of metal for this 

Fig. 27. 

Heads of a bull and a goat, cast in copper and inlaid with motlier-of-pearl, 
lapis-lazuli, etc. The bull's head was found at Tello, and that of the goat at 

[Ddc, pi. 5 ter, Fig. 2 ; Zeits. fUr Eihnol, 1901, p. 1G3.] 

purpose, though they continued to be manufactured in 
considerable quantities during the later periods. Here 
the mould, in a single piece, was cut in stone or some 
other hard, material,^ and the clay, 
after being impressed into it, was 
smoothed down on the back by liand. 
The flat border of clay left by the 
upper surface of the mould, was fre- 
quently not removed, so that the 
figures are sometimes found standing 
out from a flat background in the 
manner of a sculptured plaque, or 
bas-relief. In the period of Gudea, 
the mould was definitely used as a 
stamp, thus returning to the original 
use from which its later employment 
was developed. Interesting examples 
of such later stamped figures include representations 
of a god wearing a horned headdress, to which are added 
the ears of a bull, and of a hero, often identified with 
Gilfiramesh, who holds a vase from which two streams 

Fia. 28. 

Stamped terra - cotta 
figure of a bearded god, 
wearing the horned head- 
dress, to which are at- 
tached the ears of a bull. 
Period of Gudea. 

[Ddc, pi. 39, Fig. 3.] 

1 Like the brick-stamps, they may sometimes have been made of clay 
burnt to an extreme hardness. 


of water flow/ Tlie clay employed for the votive 
figures is extremely fine in quality, and most of them 
are baked to a degree of hardness resembling stone 
or metal. 

Tlie art of inlaying was widely practised by the 
Sumerians, who not only treated metal in this way, but 
frequently attempted to give niore expression or life to 
stone statues by inlaying tlie white of the eye with 
mother-of'-])earl or shell, and representing the pupil and 
iris by lapis lazuli or bitumen. A similar method was 

employed to enrich vo- 
tive stone figures of 
animals, and to give a 
varied and polychrome 
effect to vases carved 
in stone. The finest 
example of this class of 
work is a libation-vase 
of Gudea made of dark 
green steatite, which 
was dedicated by him 
to his patron deity Nin- 
gishzida. The vase has 
a short projecting spout 
running up from the 
base and grooved, so as 
to allow only a small 
stream of hquid to 
escape during the pour- 
ing of a libation. Its scheme of decoration is interesting 
as it affords an excellent example of the more fantastic 
side of Sumerian art, inspired by a large and important 
section of the religious belief. The two intertwined 
serpents, whose tongues touch the point where the 
Ji(]uid would leave the vase, are modelled from nature, 
but the winged monsters on each side well illustrate the 
Sumerian origin of later l^abylonian demonology. 

It is probable that such composite monsters, with the 
bodies and heads of serpents and the wings and talons of 
birds, were originally male\'olent in character, but here, 

Fig. 29. 

Scheme of decoration from a libation-vaso 
of Gudea, made of dark gieen steatite and 
originally inlaid with shell. 

[D^c, pi. 44, Pig. 2 ; cf. Cat., p. 281.] 

' See llie st.inipcd figure jmlilished on tlie plate opposite p. 
terra-rntta in tlie Hritisli Mii.«;eiun. 

72 from a 





f,'*^ y ' 


'£^.i^! i 


I.MPRKSSICiN OF A ( VI I NDKk-sKAI KxNGkAMJ) Willi S( KNES RF] Kl- '-I- Nl I .\ ( , AN 

Brit. A/ Its., A'o. S9147. 





- ^ 

' '^ /I 



/}>■//. .IfltS.. Xo. Sg^oS. 


^ . 

-^-n^ . ^ 

?f jvti 1 


BrU. Mils., No. 89538. 


like the serpents, they are clearly represented as tamed, 
and in the service of the god to whom the vase was dedi- 
cated. This is sufficiently proved by the ringed staffs 
they carry,^ their modified horned headdresses, and their 
carefully twisted locks of hair. They were peculiarly 
sacred to Ningishzida and in Fig. 12 they may be 
seen rising as emblems from his shoulders. The rich 
effect of the dark green steatite was originally enhanced 
by inlaying, for the bodies of the dragons are now 
pitted with deep holes. These were no doubt originally 
inlaid with some other material, probably shell, whicli 
has been found employed for this purpose in a fragment 
of a vase of a very similar character. 

In the same category with the monsters on the vase 
we may class the human-headed bulls, of which small 
sculptured figures, in a recumbent attitude, have been 
found at Tello ; these were afterwards adopted by the 
Assyrian kings, and employed as the colossal guardians 
of their palace door-ways. The extent to which this 
particular form of composite monster was employed 
for religious and decorative purposes may be seen on 
the cyhnder-seals, upon which in the earlier period it 
represents the favourite device. Examples are fre- 
quently found in decorative combinations, together with 
figures of early bearded heroes, possibly to be identified 
with Gilgamesh, and with a strange creature, half-man 
and half-bull, resembling the later descriptions of Ea- 
bani, who strive with lions and other animals.^ Gudca's 
catalogue of the temple furniture and votive objects, 
with which he enriched E-ninnu, throws light upon the 
manner in which Sumerian art reflected this aspect of 
the Sumerian religion. Some of the legends and belief's 
may well have been derived from Semitic sources, but 
the imageiy, which exerted so strong an influence upon 
the development of their art, may probably be traced 
to the Sumerians themselves. 

* The ringed staff occurs as a sacred cinltlein upon cylinder-seals, and is 
sometimes carried by heroes (cf. p. 82, Fig. 34). A colossal example of one, 
made of wood and slieathed in copper, was found at Tello by De Sarzec 
(see Ileuzey, "Rev. d'Assyr.," I\'., p. 112, and "Dec. en Cbalde'e," pi. 57, 
Fig, 1), but the precise use and significance of the object has not beeu 

^ See the plate opposite p. 7G, and sec below, p. 174 t. 


The engraving upon cylinder - seals during the 
Sunicrian period appears to luive heen done generally 
by hand, without the help of a drill or a revolving 
tool/ Outline engraving with the point was also 
practised, that on stone having probably }) receded the 
use of the bas-relief," but it continued to be employed 
in the later periods for the decoration of metal and 
shell. The finest example of metal engraving is the 
silver vase of Entemena, around which is incised in 
outline a decorative band, consisting of variations of 
the emblem of Eagash, arranged beneath a row of 
seven calves. But the largest number of designs 
engraved in outline liave been found, not upon stone 
or metal, but upon shell. It is an interesting fact that 
among the smaller objects found by JVI. de Sarzee at 
Tello, there is not a single fragment of ivory, and it 
would seem that this material was not known to the 
earliest inhabitants of Babylonia, a fact which has some 
bearing on the disputed question of their relations to 
Egypt, and to the earlier stages of Egyptian culture.^ 

From the earliest period at Lagash fragments of 
shell were employed in place of ivory, and the effect 
produced by it is nearly the same. Certain species 
of great univalves or conch-shells, which are found in 
the Indian Ocean, have a thick core or centre, and 
these furnished the material for a large number of the 
earliest cylinder-seals. Small plaques or lozenges could 
also be obtained from the core by sectional cutting, 
while the curved part of tlie shell was sometimes 
employed for objects to which its convex form could 
be adapted. The numerous flat lozenges that have 
been found are shaped for inlaying furniture, caskets, 
and the like, and curved pieces were probably fitted to 
others of a like shape in order to form small cups and 
vases. Each piece is decorated with fine engraving, 
and in nearly every instance the outline is accentuated 

1 It should be noted tliat a {cw of the early cylinder-seals found at Fara 
Andrae considers to have been enp^ravcd with the help of the wheel (see 
"Mitteil. dcr Deutsch. Orient.-Gesellscliaft," No. 17, p- 5). The sugrgestion 
has also been made that, on the introduction of harder sloiics, the cutting 
to(d may have been tip])cd witli a flake of corundum ; cf. Hayes AVard, 
" Cylinders and other Oriental Seals," p. 13. 

■^ I'^or early examples, see above, p. 49. 

^ See further, Chap. XII. 



by the employment of a very slight relief. The 
designs are often spirited, and they prove that even 
in the earliest periods the Sumerian draughtsman had 
attained to a high standard of proficiency. 

One of the most interesting engraved fragments 
that have been recovered consists of a slightly curved 
piece of shell, which probably formed part of a small 
bowl or cup. The rest of the side seems to ha\'e 
been built up of pieces of similar shape, held together 
by bitumen, or, more probably, fitted to a metal lining 
by rivets through holes in the shell. The scene 
engraved upon the 

fragment represents a [ \i'\/^^Cj^^'^^^^^^] 

lion seizing a bull in ' '' ' ^^^ 

a thicket of shrubs or 
high flowering plants. 
Though the group 
upon the fragment is 
complete in itself, 
there are indications 
that it formed only 
part of a more ela- 
borate composition. 
For in the space on 
the right of the frag- 
ment behind the lion's 

Fig. 30. 

Convex panel of shell from the side of a cup, 
engraved with a scene representing a lion 
attacking a bull ; early Sumerian period. 
[D^c, pi. 46, No. 3 ; cf. Cat. p. 189.] 

mane are engraved 

two weapons. The upper one is a hilted dagger with 
its point towards the lion; this may be compared with 
the short daggers held by the mythological beings 
resembling Ea-bani upon one of Lugal-anda's seals, 
with which they are represented as stabbing lions in 
the neck.^ Below is a hand holding a curved mace 
or throwing stick, formed of three strands bound with 
leather thongs or bands of metal, like that held by 
Eannatum upon the Stele of the Vultures.^ It is, there- 
fore, clear that on the panel to the right of the lion 
and bull a king, or patesi, was represented in the act 
of attacking the lion, and we may infer that the whole 
of the cup was decorated with a continuous band of 
engraving, though some of the groups in the design 

* See below, p. 175. ^ See the plate opposite p. 12-L 


muy luive been arriinged symmetricully, with repetitions 
such as are found upon the earlier cyhnder-seals. 

The position of the hon upon the fragment, repre- 
sented with hixuriant mane and wdth head facing tlie 
sjieetator, and the vigour of the design as a whole 
combined with certain inequalities of treatment, have 
suggested a comparison with the hons upon the 
sculptured mace-head of IVIesilijii. The piece has, 
therefore, ])een assigned to the epoch of the earlier 
kings of Kish, anterior to the period of Ur-Nina.^ It 
may perhaps belong to the rather later period of Ur- 
Nina's dynasty, but, even so, it suffices to indicate the 

Fig. 31. 

Fig. 32. 

Fig. 33. 

Three fragments of shell engraved with animal forms, which illustrate the 
growth of a naturalistic treatment in Sumeriau design. 
[D^c, pi. 46, Nos. 4, 5, and 8.] 

excellence in design and draughtsmanship attained by 
the earlier Sumerians. In vigour and originality their 
representations of animals were unequalled by those of 
the later inhabitants of Babylonia and Assyria, until 
shortly before the close of the Assyrian empire. But 
the Sumerian artists only gradually acquired their skill, 
and on some of the engraved fragments recovered it 
is possible to trace an advance on earlier work. The 
designs in the accompanying blocks have been selected 
as illustrating, to some extent, the change which 
gradually took place in the treatment of animal forms 
by the Sumerians 

Of the three designs, that on the left is engraved 
upon a convex piece of shell, thin as the shell of an 

« See Ileuzey, " Catalogue," p. 887. 



egg ; it represents a lion-headed eagle which has 
swooped down upon the back of a human-headed bull 
and is attacking him with mouth and claws. The 
subject resembles that found upon the most primitive 
Sumerian cylinder- seals, and its rough and angular 
treatment is sufficient indication of the very archaic 
character of the work. The central panel resembles 
in shape that of the lion and the buU.^ The design 
represents a leaping ibex with flowering plants in the 
background, and the drawing is freer and less stiff than 
that of the animals on the silver vase of Entemena.^ 
Some archaic characteristics may still be noted, such 
as the springing tufts of hair at the joints of the hind 
legs ; but the general treatment of the subject marks 
a distinct advance upon the archaic conventions of the 
earlier fragment. The third design is that of a leaping 
kid, engraved upon a flat piece of shell and cut out for 
inlaying. Here the drawing is absolutely true to nature, 
and the artist has even noted the slight swelling of the 
head caused by the growing horns. 

The Sumerians do not appear to have used complete 
shells for engraving, like those found on Assyrian and 
Aegean sites. A complete shell has indeed been re- 
covered, but it is in an unworked state and bears 
a dedicatory formula of Ur-Ningirsu, the son and 
successor of Gudea. Since it is not a fine specimen 
of its class, we may suppose that it was selected for 
dedication merely as representing the finer shells 
employed by the workmen in the decoration of tlie 
temple-furniture. The Sumerians at a later period 
engraved designs upon mother-of-pearl. When used 
in plain pieces for inlaying it certainly gave a more 
brilliant effect than shell, but to the engraver it offered 
greater difficulties in consequence of its brittle and 
scaly surface. Pieces have been found, however, on 
which designs have been cut, and these were most 
frequently employed for enriching the handles of 
knives and daggers. The panels in the accompanying 
blocks will serve to show that the same traditional 
motives are reproduced which meet us in the earlier 

^ See above, p. 79, Fig-. 30. 

* See above, p. 78, and below, p. 167 f. 



designs upon fragments of shell and cylinder-seals. 
They include a bearded hero, the eagle attacking the 
bull, a hero in conflict Avith a lion, the lion-headed 
eagle of I^agash, a winged lion, a lion attacking an 
ibex, and a stag. Even when allowance is made for 
the didiculties presented by the material, it will be 
seen that the designs themselves rank far below those 
found upon shell. I'he employment of mother-of- 
pearl for engraving may thus be assigned to a period 
of decadence in Sumerian art when it had lost much 
of its earlier freshness and vigour. 

Fig. 35. 

Fig. 36. 

Fig. 37. 

Four panels of mother-of pearl, engraved with Sumerian designs, which were 
employed for inlaying the handles of daggers. They helong to a period of 
decadence in Sumerian art. 

[In the Louvre ; Cat. Nos. 232 ft.] 

The above brief sketch of the principal forms and 
productions of Sumerian art may serve to vindicate the 
claim of the Sumerians to a place among the more 
artistic races of antiquity. Much oriental art is merely 
quaint, or interesting from its history and peculiarities, 
but that of the Sumerians is considerably more than 
this. Its sculpture never acquired the dull monotony 
of the As.syrian bas-reliefs with their over-elaboration 
of detail, intended doubtless to cloak the poverty of 
the design. Certain conventions persisted through all 
periods, but the Sumerian scidptor was never a slave to 
them. He relied largely on his own taste and intelli- 
gence, and even the earliest work is bold and spirited. 
After centuries of independent development iVesli vigour 
was introduced by the nomad Semitic races who settled 


in the north, but in the hands of the later Semites the 
Sumerian ideals were not maintained. For the finest 
period of l^abylonian art we must go back to a time 
some centuries before the founding of the Babylonian 

chapti:r iv^ 


IX their origin tlie great cities of Babylonia were little 
more than collections of rude huts constructed at 
first of reeds cut in the marshes, and gradually 
giving place to rather more substantial buildings of 
clay and sundried brick. From the very beginning it 
would appear that the shrine of the local god played 
an important part in the foundation and subsequent 
development of each centre of population. Of the 
prehistoric period in Babylonia we know little, but 
it may be assumed that, already at the time of the 
Sumerian immigration, rude settlements had been formed 
around the cult-centres of local gods. This, at any 
rate, was the character of eacli town or city of the 
Sumerians themselves during the earliest periods to 
which we can trace back their history. At Fara, 
the most primitive Sumerian site that has yet been 
examined, we find the god Shuruppak giving his ow^n 
name to the city around his shrine, and Ningirsu of 
Lagash dominates and directs his people from the first. 
Other city-gods, who afterwards became powerful deities 
in the Babylonian pantheon, are already in existence, and 
have actjuired in varying degrees their later characters. 
Enki of Eridu is already the god of the deep, the 
shrine of Enzu or Nannar in the city of Ur is a centre 
of tlie moon-cult, Babbar of Larsa appears already as 
a sun-god ajid tlie dispenser of law and justice, while 
the most powerful Sumerian goddess, Ninni or Nana 
of P^rcch, already has her shrine and worshippers in the 
city of her choice. 

By what steps the city-gods acquired their later 



characters it is impossible now to say, but we may 
assume that the process was a gradual one. In the 
earlier stages of its history the character of the local 
god, like that of liis city, must have been far more 
simple and primitive than it appears to us as seen in 
the light of its later development. The autliority of 
each god did not extend beyond the limits of his own 
people's territory. Each city was content to do battle 
on his behalf, and the defeat of one was synonymous 
with the downfall of tlie other. AVith the gradual 
amalgamation of the cities into larger states, the god 
of the predominant city would naturally take prece- 
dence over those of the conquered or dependent towns, 
and to the subsecjuent process of adjustment we may 
probably trace the relationships between the different 
deities and the growth of a pantheon. That Enki 
should have been the god of the deep from the begin- 
ning is natural enough in view of Eridu's position on an 
expanse of water connected with the Persian Gulf. 
But how it came about that Ur was the centre of a 
moon-cult, or that Sippar in the north and Larsa in the 
south were peculiarly associated with the worship of the 
sun, are questions which cannot as yet be answered, 
though it is probable that future excavations on their 
sites may tlirow some liglit upon the subject. 

In the case of one city excavation lias already 
enabled us to trace the gradual growth of its temple 
and the surrounding habitations during a considerable 
portion of tlieir history. The city of Nippur stands in 
a peculiar relation to others in Sumer and Akkad, as 
being the central slu-ine in the two countries and the 
seat of Enlil, the cliief of the gods. NifFer, or NufFar, 
is the name by which the mounds marking its site are 
still known. They have been long deserted, and, like 
the sites of many other ancient cities in Babylonia and 
Assyria, no modern town or village is built upon tliem 
or in their immediate neighbourhood. The nearest 
small town is Suk el-'Afej, about four miles to the 
south, lying on the eastern edge of the 'Afej marshes, 
which begin to the south of NifFer and stretch away to 
the west. The nearest large town is Diwaniya, on the 
left bank of the Euphrates twenty miles to the south-west. 


Tn the summer tlie marslics in the neighbourhood 
of the mounds consist of j)ools of water connected 
by channels throuoii the rced-beds, but in the spring, 
when the snows have melted in the Taurus and the 
mountains of Kurdistan, the flood-water converts the 
marshes into a vast higoon. and all that meets the eye 
are isolated date-palms and a few small hamlets built 
on rising knolls above the water-level. 

Although, during the floods, Niffer is at times nearly 
isolated, the water never approaches within a consider- 
able distance of the actual mounds. This is not due to 
any natural conflguration of the soil, but to tlie fact 
that around the inner city, the site of which is marked 
by the mounds, there was built an outer ring of habita- 
tions at a time when the enclosed town of the earlier 
periods became too small to contain the growing 
population. The American excavations, which have 
been conducted on the site between the years 1889 and 
1900, have shown that the earliest area of habitation was 
far more restricted than the mounds which cover the 
inner city.^ In the plan on p. 88 it will be seen that 
this portion of the site is divided into two parts by the 
ancient bed of the Shaft en-Nil. The contours of the 
mounds are indicated by dotted lines, and each of them 
bears a number in Roman figures. Moinid III. is that 
which covered E-kur, the temple of Enlil, and it was 
around the shrine, in the shaded area upon the plan, 
that the original village or settlement was probably 
built. Here in the lowest stratum of the mound were 
found large beds of wood ashes and animal bones, the 
remains of the earliest period of occupation. 

It is difficult to trace through all its stages the early 
growth of the city, but it would seem that the shrine 
in the centre of the town was soon raised upon an 
artificial mound to protect it during periods of inunda- 
tion. Moreover, as at Fara, the original settlement 
must have expanded quickly, for even below the 
mounds to the south-west of the Shaft en-Nil, strata 
have been found similar in character to those under 

^ For an account of tlie excavations at Nippur and tlioir results, see 
Hilpreclit, " Explorations in Bihle Lands," pp. 28!) fF., and Fisher, " Excava- 
tions at Nippur," Pt. I. (11)05), Tt. II. (l<)0<i). 



the temple-mound, as well as brieks and wells of the 
pre-Sargonic period. In reconstructing the plan of 
the later areas occupied by the temple and its enclosure, 

Early Babylonian plan of the temple of Enlil at Nippur and ita enclosure, 
drawn upon a clay tablet dating from the first half of the second miilouuium B.o. 
The labels on the plan are translated from notes on the original. 
[Cf. Fisher, "Excavations at Nippur," I., pi. 1.] 

considerable assistance has been obtained from an 
ancient plan of the temple, drawn upon a clay tablet 
that was found at Nippur. From the form of the 


c'liaracters inscribed upon it, it does not appear to date 
from an earlier period than the first half* of the second 
niillenniiiin b.c\, but it may well be a copy of an older 
original since the form of its temple-enclose appears to 
am-ee with that in the time of Naram-Sin as revealed 
by the excavations. In it the position of E-kur is 
marked at one end of a great enclosure surrounded by 
an irregular wall. The enclosure is cut by a canal or 
sluice, on the other side of which stood temple-store- 

0*»i&in*i. Town ;t.^ wi\ 
tiTCnoeC CrKLOSJHt IKo ///// 

firiAL tKTcrrr or mtttn crrr thin ww 

comouHd C noun03 AnO ioVtLiiLQ Cahau capU tk.» 




— -.y 






OUARTtRS ! \|f- 

IV ; /fel 


^ i > a» 








R : Tht inrttR CITY 
Ants nitiLfl 

i 1 

houses. The position of gates in the wall are marked, 
and it will be noted that a large stream, labelled the 
Eupln-ates, washes its upper side, wliile on its other 
sides are terraces and moats. These details are incor- 
porated in the accompanying plan, but their suggested 
relation to the remains imcovered in the course of the 
excavations is largely conjectural. Moreover the period 
in the temple's liistory represented by the tablet is not 
certainly established, and some of the details such as 


the ground-plan of the temple itself may reproduce its 
later form. 

The most striking feature in the temple-area, which 
was uncovered in the course of the excavations, is the 
great temple-tower, or ziggurat, erected by Ur-Engur, 
and faced by him with kiln-baked bricks bearing his 
name and inscription.' 'J'he ziggurat in its later and 
imposing form was built by him, though within its 
structure were foimd the cores of earlier and smaller 
towers, erected by Naram-Sin and during the pre- 
Sargonic period. In fact, Ur-Engur considerably 
altered the appearance of the temple. In addition to 
building the ziggurat, he raised the level of the inner 
court above Naram-Sin's pavement, and he straightened 
the course of the outer wall, using that of Naram-Sin 
as a foundation where it crossed his line. His wall also 
included mounds XII. and V., in the latter of which 
many of the temple-archives have been found. During 
the Kassite period these were stored in buildings in 
mound X., across the Shatt en-Nil in the area included 
\v4thin the inner city during the later periods. An 
alteration in the course of the river from the north-east 
to the south-west side of the temple area probably 
dates from the period of Samsu-iluna, who upon a 
cone found in debris in the temple-court records that 
he erected a dam and dug out a new channel for the 
Euphrates. His object in doing so was probably to 
bring a supply of water within reach of the later 
extension of the city on the south-west side. 

The excavations on the site of Nippur and its 
temple have illustrated the gradual increase in the size 
of a Sumerian city, and the manner in which the 
temple of the city-god retained its position as the 
central and most important building. The diggings, 
however, have thrown little light upon the form the 
temple assumed during periods anterior to the Dynasty 
of Ur. In fact, we do not yet know the form or 
arrangement of an early Sumerian temple ; for on early 
sites such as Fara, Surghul, and Bismaya, the remains 
of no important building were uncovered, while the 
scanty remains of Ningirsu's temple at Tello date from 

' M a later period this was converted into a Parthian fortress. 


the comparatively late period of Ur-15au and Giidea. 
On tlie latter site, however, a nnniher of earlier con- 
structions have been discovered, and, althoui^h they are 
not of a purely religious character, they may well have 
been employed in connection with the temple service. 
Apart from private dwellings, they are the only build- 
ings of the early Sumerians that have as yet been 
recovered, and they forcibly illustrate the primitive 
character of the cities of this time. 

The group of oldest constructions at Tello was 
discovered in the mound known as K, which rises to 
a height of se\'cnteen metres above the plain. It is 
the largest and highest after the Palace Tell, to the 
south-east of which it lies at a distance of about two 
hundred metres.^ Here, during his later excavations 
on the site, M. de Sarzec came upon the remains of 
a regular agricultural establishment, which throw an 
interesting light upon certain passages in the early 
foundation-inscriptions referring to constructions of a 
practical rather than of a purely religious character. 
It is true the titles of these buildings are often difficult 
to explain, but the mention of different classes of 
plantations in connection with them proves that they 
were mainly intended for agricultural purposes. Their 
titles are most frequently met with in Entemena's 
records, but Ur-Nina refers by name to the principal 
storehouse, and the excavations have shown that before 
his time this portion of the city had already acquired 
its later character. Here was situated the administrative 
centre of the sacred properties attached to the temples, 
and possibly also those of the patesi himself. It is 
true that the name of Ningirsu's great storehouse does 
not occur upon bricks or records found in the ancient 
structures u])on Tell K, but it is quite possible that 
this was not a name for a single edifice, but was a 
general title for the Avhole complex of buildings, courts 
and outhouses employed in connection with the pre- 
paration and storage of produce from the city's lands 
and plantations. 

At a depth of only two and a half metres from 
the surface of the tell M. de Sarzec came upon a 

* See the phm ofTello on p. 19. 


^ :: 

2 ■" 




bnildino- of the period of Giidea, of which only the 
anole of a wall remained. But, unlike the great Palace 
Tell, where the lowest diggings revealed nothing earlier 
than the reign of Ur-13au, a deepening of his trenches 
here resulted in the recovery of buildings dating from 
the earliest periods in the history of the city. In 
accordance with the practice of the country, as each 
new building had been erected on the site, the founda- 
tions of the one it had displaced were left intact and 
carefully preserved within the new platform, in order 
to raise the building still higher above the plain and 
form a solid substructure for its support. To this 
practice we owe the preservation, in a comparatively 
complete form, of the foundations of earlier structures 
in the mound. At no great depth beneath Gudea's 
building were unearthed the remains of Ur-Nina's 
storehouse. Comparatively small in size, it is oriented 
by its angles, the two shorter sides facing north-west 
and south-east, and the two longer ones south-west 
and north-east, in accordance with the normal Sumerian 
system.' It was built of kiln-baked bricks, not square 
and Hat like those of Ciudea or of Sargon and Naram- 
Sin, but oblong and plano-convex, and each bore the 
mark of a right thumb imprinted in the middle of 
its con\'ex side. A few of the bricks that were found 
bear Ur-Nina's name in linear characters, and record 
his construction of the " House of Girsu," while one 
of them refers to the temple of Ningirsu. These may 
not have been in their original positions, but there is 
little doubt that the storehouse dates from Ur-Nina's 
reign, and it may well ha\e been employed in con- 
nection with the temple of the city-god. 

Built upon a platform composed of three layers of 
bricks set in bitumen, the walls of the building were 
still preserved to the height of a few feet. It is to 
be noted that on none of the sides is there a trace 
of any doorway or entrance, and it is probable that 
access was obtained from the outside by ladders of 
wood, or stairways of unburnt brick, reaching to the 
upper story. At D and E on the plan are traces 
of what may have been either steps or buttresses, but 

* For example, compare the orientation of Enlil's temple on p. 88. 


these do not belong to the original building and were 
added at a later time. The al)sence of any entrance 
certainly proves tliat tlie building was employed as a 
storehouse/ Within the building are two chambers, 
the one square {A), the other of a more oblong shape 
(H). They were separated })y a transverse passage or 
corridor (C), which also ran round inside the outer 
walls, thus giving the interior chamber additional 
security. The double walls were well calculated to 





laLD: storehouse: orm-HiMA 






protect the interior from damp or heat, and would 
render it more difficult for pillagers to effect an entrance. 
Both in the chambers and the passages a coating of 
bitumen was spread upon the floor and walls. Here 
grain, oil, and fermented drink could have been stored 
in quantity, and the building may also have served 
as a magazine for arms and tools, and for the more 
precious kinds of building material. 

Around the outside of the building, at a distance 

' It has been coniparcMl to the g^ranaries of Effypt as flepictefl in wall 
paintings or represented l»y models placed in the tombs ; cf. Ileuzey, " Viu 
Villa royale chaldeeiniej" p. 1) f. 




of about four metres from it, are a series of eight 
brick bases, two on each side, in a direct hne with 
the walls.^ On these stood pillars of cedar-wood, of 
which the charred remains were still visible. They 
probably supported a great wooden portico or gallery, 
whicli ran round the walls of the building and was 
doubtless used for the temporary storage of goods and 
agricultural implements. (Jn the north-east side of the 
building a brick pavement (F) extended for some 
distance beyond the gallery, and at the southern angle, 
within the row of pillars and beneath the roof of the 
portico, was a small double basin (G) carefully lined 
with bitumen. At a greater distance from the house 
were two larger basins or tanks (I and K), with plat- 
forms built beside them of brick and bitumen (J and 
L) ; with one of them was connected a channel or water- 
course (M). At a later time Eannatum sunk a well 
not far to the west of Ur-Nina's storehouse, and from 
it a similar water-course ran to a circular basin ; a 
large oval basin and others of rectangular shape were 
found rather more to the north. These, like Ur-Xina's 
tanks, were probably employed for the washing of 
vessels and for the cleansing processes which accom- 
panied the pre- 
paration and stor- 
age of date-wine, 
the pressing of oil, 
and the numerous 
other occupations 
of a large agricul- 
tural conununity. 
A still earlier 
building was dis- 
covered at a depth 
of five metres be- 
low that of Ur- 
Nina, but it is 
more difficult to 
determine the purpose to which it was put. It was built 
upon a solid platform (C), which has the same orienta- 
tion as Ur-Nina's storehouse and rises above the ground 

1 See li, H on plan. 



1 J 5 1. » 

St • I I ~t ^ 


level marked by the remains of a brick pavement (D). 
It is strancre tliat the buildin-r itself is not in the centre 
of the platform and for some unknown reason was set 
at a slight angle to it. It consists of two chambers, 
each with a doorway, the smaller chamber (A) on a 
level with the platform, the larger one (B) considerably 
below it, from which it must have been reached by a 
ladder. At intervals along the surface of the walls 
were cavities lined with bitumen, which may have sup- 
ported the wooden columns of a superstructure, or 
possibly the supports of an arched roof of reeds. It 
is possible that we here have a form of religious edifice, 

but tlie depth of the larger 
chamber suggests that, like Ur- 
Nina's building, it was employed 
as a sort of store-house or 

The bricks of the building 
were small and plano-convex, 
with thumb - im]iressions and 
witliout inscriptions, so that it 
is impossible to recover the 
name of its builder. But the 
objects found at the same deep 
level indicate a high antiquity, 
and present us with a picture of 
some of the inhabitants of the 
country at a time when this 
building, which was one of the 
oldest constructions at Lagash, 
stood upon the surface of the 
mound. The circular relief, 
sculptured wuth the meeting of the chieftains,^ was found 
in fragments near the building. Another archaic piece 
of sculpture of the same remote period, which was also 
found in the neighbourhood, represents a figure, crowned 
with palm-branches ; one hand is raised in an attitude 
of speech or adoration, and on the right are two stan- 
dards supporting what appear to be colossal mace-heads. 
The sex of the figure is uncertain, but it may well be 
that of a woman ; the lines below the chin which come 

* See above, p. 45 f. 

Fig. 33. 

Archaic plaque from Telle, en- 
graved in low relief with a scene 
of adoration. In an inscription 
on the stone, which appears to 
enumerate a list of offerings, 
reference is made to Ningirsu 
and his temple E-ninnu. 
[D^., pi. 1 bis, Fig. 1.] 


from behind the ear, are not necessarily a beard, but may 
be intended for a thick lock of hair falling over tlie 
right shoulder. The scene probably represents an act 
of worship, and an archaic inscription on the field of 
the plaque appears to record a list of offerings, probably 
in honour of Ningirsu, whose name is mentioned to- 
gether with that of his temple E-ninnu. It is interest- 
ing to note that in this very early age the temple of 
the city-god of Lagash already bore its later name. 

The earliest written records of the Sumerians which 
we possess, apart from those engraved upon stone and 
of a purely votive character, concern the sale and 
donation of land, and they prove that certain customs 
were already in vogue with regard to the transfer of 
property, which we meet with again in later historical 
periods. A few such tablets of rounded form and 
fashioned of unburnt clay were found at Lagash on Tell 
K, and slightly below the level of Ur-Nina's build- 
ing;^ they may thus be assigned to a period anterior 
to his reign. Others of the same rounded form, but 
of baked clay, have been found at Shuruppak. It is 
a significant fact that several of these documents, after 
describing the amount of land sold and recording the 
principal price that was paid for it, enumerate a 
number of supplementary presents made by the buyer 
to the seller and his associates.^ Tlie presents consist 
of oxen, oil, wool and cloth, and precisely similar gifts 
are recorded on the Obelisk of ISIanishtusu.'' It would 
thus appear that even in this early period the system of 
land tenure was already firmly established, which pre- 
vailed in both Sumer and Akkad under the earlier 
historical rulers. 

From the Shuruppak tablets we also learn the 
names of a number of early rulers or officials of that 
city, in whose reigns or periods of office the documents 
were drawn up. Among the names recovered are 
those of Ur-Ninpa, Kanizi and JMash-Shuruppak, but 
they are given no titles on the tablets, and it is 

» Cf. Heuzey, " Une Villa royale," p. 24. 

2 Cf. Thureau-Dan<rin, " Ilecueil de tablettcs clialdeenues," p. i. f., 
Nos. Iff., Off., and " Rev. d'Assyr.," VI., pp. 11 ff. 

3 See below, Chap. VII., p. 206 f. 


impossible to say Avlictlicr tlicir office preceded 
tliat of the patesi, or they were magistrates 
of the city who were subordinate to a ruler of higher 
rank. -^Vnother of these early deeds of sale is inscribed, 
not upon a tablet, but on the body of a black stone 
statuette that lias been found at Tello.' From the 
text M'c learn that the buyer of the property was a 

Fig. 39. 

Firruro of Lupad, a high official of the city of Uinma, inscribed with a text 
recording a purchase of land in Lagash (Shirpurla) ; from Tello. 
[In the Louvre; cf. Comptes rcndus, 1907, p. 518.] 

certain Lupad, and the figure is evidently intended 
to represent him. Although it was found on the site 
of Lagash, and the text records a purchase of land in 
that city, it is remarkable that Lupad is described as 
a high official of the neighbouring city of Umma, 
which was the principal rival of I^agash during the 
greater part of its history. 'I'he archaic character of 

' Cf. Heuzey and Thuroau-Danfrin, "Coniptes reiidiis de I'Acad. des 
Inscriptions," l'.)07, pp. 51G ff. 'llie licad of the fipure had hccu found many 
years before by M. de Sarzec, and was published in " Dec. en Chald.," pi. 6 ter. 
Figs. 1 a and b. 




the sculpture, and the early form of "writing upon it, 
suggest a date not much later than that of Ur-Nina, 
so that we must suppose the transaction took place 
at a period when one of the two rival cities acknow- 
ledged the suzerainty of the other. Unlike other 
Sumcrian figures that have been recovered, I^upad's 
head has a sliglit ridge over the brow and below the 
cheek-bones. This has been explained 
by Heiizey as representing short hair 
and beard, but it more probably indi- 
cates the limits of those portions of 
the head and face that were shaved.^ 
Thus Lupad presents no exception 
to the general Sumerian method of 
treating the hair. 

In order to assign a date to such 
figures as that of Lupad, it is neces- 
sary, in the absence of, other evidence, 
to be guided entirely by the style of the 
sculpture and the character of the writ- 
ing. Several such figures of archaic 
Sumerian type have been recovered, 
and three of them represent kings 
wlio ruled in different cities at this 
early period. The finest of these is a 
standing figure of Esar, King of Adab, 
which was found in the coiu'se of the 
American excavations at liismaya, and 
is now preserved in the Imperial 
Ottoman JNIuseum at Constantinople. 
Its discoverers claimed that it was the 
earliest example of Sumerian sculpture known,^ but it 
may be roughly placed at about the time of Ur-Nina's 
dynasty. A second king is represented by two frag- 
ments of a statuette from Tello, inscribed in archaic 
characters M'itli a dedicatory text of E-abzu, King of 
Umma,^ while the third is a seated figure of a king of 
the northern city or district of INIa'er, or ]Mari, and is 

Fig. 40. 

Statue of Esar, King 
of Adab, preserved in 
the Imperial Ottoman 
Museum at Constanti- 
nople ; from Bismaya. 

1 Cf. Mevcr, "Sum. und Sem.," p. 81, n. 2. 

" Cf. Banks, "Scientific American," Aug. 19, 1905, p. 137, and "Amcr. 
Jouru. Semit. Lang," XXI., p. 59. 
3 "Dec. eu Chald./' pi. 5, No. 3. 



preserved in the British JMuseuni.^ The same uncer- 
tainty apphes to the date of Ur-Enhl, a patesi of Nippur, 
whose name is mentioned on one of the fragments of 
votive vases from tliat city whicli were found together 
on the south-east side of the temple-tower.^ As in the 

case of Esar, King of 
Adab, Ave can only as- 
sign these rulers approxi- 
mately to the period of 
the earlier rulers of La- 

It is in the city of 
Lagash that our know- 
ledge of Sumerian his- 
tory may be said to begin. 
The excavation of the 
site has yielded an abun- 
dance of material from 
which it is possible to 
arrange her rulers for 
long periods in chrono- 
logical order, and to re- 
construct the part they 
played in conflicts be- 
tween the early city- 
states. It is true that 
some of her earlier kings 
and patesis remain little 
more than names to us, 
but with the accession of 
Ur-Xina we enter a 
period in which our 
knowledge of events is 
continuous, so far at least 
as the fortunes of the city 
were concerned. With 

Fig. 41. 

Emblems of the city of Lagash (Shir- 
purla) and of the god Niugirsu. The upper 
drawing represents a perforated plaque 
dedicated to Ningirsu by Ur-Nina. Below 
is a brick stamped with the figure of Imgig, 
the lion-headed eagle of Ningirsu. 

[In the Louvre ; Cat. No. 7 and Die, pi. 31 
bis, No. 1.] 

the growth of her power it is also possible to trace in 
some detail the relations she maintained with other 
great cities in the land. 

1 See the plate opposite p. 102. The king of Ma'er's figure is the one oil 
the right. 

2 Cf. Hilprccht, "Old Hab. liiscr.," 11., pi. 44, No. DG, and Thureau- 
Dangiu, " Kouigsiuschriften," p. 158 f. 



At the earliest period of whieh we have any historical 
records it would appear that the city of Kish exercised 
a suzerainty over Sumer. Here there ruled at this 
time a king named Mesilim, to whom I^agash, and 
probably other great cities hi the south, owed allegiance. 
During his reign a certain Lugal-shag-engur was patesi 
of Lagash, and we have definite record that he acknow- 
ledged Mesihm's supremacy. For 
a votive mace-head of colossal size 
has been found at Tello, which 
bears an inscription stating that it 
was dedicated to Ningirsu by 
Mesilim, who had restored his 
great temple at Lagash during 
the time that Lugal-shag-engur 
was patesi of that city.^ The 
text, the brevity of which is cha- 
racteristic of these early votive 
inscriptions, consists of but a few 
words, and reads : " INIesilim, King 
of Kish, the builder of the tem- 
ple of Ningirsu, deposited this 
mace-head (for) Ningirsu (at the 
time when) Lugal - shag - engur 
(was) patesi of Lagash." In spite 
of its brevity the importance of 
the inscription is considerable, 
since it furnishes a synchronism 
between two early rulers of Sumer 
and the North. 

The weapon itself, upon which 
it is engraved, is also noteworthy. 
As may be inferred from its co- 
lossal size the mace was never 
intended for actual use in battle, but was sculptured by 
Mesihm's orders with the special object of being dedi- 
cated in the temple of the god. It is decorated witli 
rudely-carved figures of lions, which run around it and 
form a single composition in relief. The lions are six in 
number, and are represented as pursuing and attacking 

» See Heuzey, "Revue d'Assyr.," IV., p. 100; cf. " Kouigsiusclulfteu," 
p. 160 f. 

Fig. i2. 

MacG-liead, dedicated to 
Ningirsu, the god of Lagash 
(Shirpurla), by Mesilim, King 
of Kish, at the time of Lugal- 
shag-engur, patesi of Lagash. 

lD6c., pi. 1 ter, No. 2 ; Cat. 
No. 4.j 


one another. Each has seized the hind-leg and the back 
of the one which precedes it ; they thus form an endless 
chain around the object, and are a most efl'ective form 
of decoration. Unlike the majority of mace-heads, that 
of JNIcsilim is not perforated from top to bottom. The 
hole for receiving the handle of the weapon, though 
deep, is not continued to the top of the stone, which 
is carved in low relief with a representation of a lion- 
headed eagle with wings outspread and claws extended. 
Looked at from above, this fantastic aninial appears as 
an isolated figure, but it is not to be separated from the 
lions running round the side of the mace-head. In fact, 
we may see in the whole composition a development of 
the symbol which formed the arms of the city of 
Lagash, and was the peculiar emblem of the city-god 
Ningirsu.^ In the latter, the lion-headed eagle grasps 
two lions by the back, and in Mesilim's sacred mace we 
have the same motive of a lion-headed eagle above 
lions. It was, indeed, a peculiarly appropriate votive 
offering for an overlord of Lagash to n^iake. As suze- 
rain of Lagash, Mesilim had repaired the temple of 
Ningirsu, the city-god ; the colossal mace-head, wrought 
with a design taken from the emblem of the city and 
its god, was thus a fitting object for his inscription. By 
depositing it in Ningirsu's temple, he not only sought 
to secure the favour of the local god by his piety, but 
he left in his city a permanent record of his own 

Of I^ugal-shag-engur we know as yet nothing 
beyond his name, and the fact that he was patesi of 
Lagash at the time of JMesilim, but the latter ruler has 
left a more enduring mark upon history. For a later 
patesi of Lagash, Entemena, when giving a historical 
summary of tlie relations which existed between his 
own city and the neighbouring city of Umma, begins 
his account with the period of Mesilim, and furnishes 
additional testimony to the part which this early 
king of Kish played in the local affairs of southern 

* See the blocks on p. 98. A variant form of the emblem occurs on the 
perforated block of Diidu (see tlie plate facing p. 110). Tliere the lions turn 
to bite tlie spread wings of tlie eagle, indicating that the emblem is symbolical 
of strife ending in the victory of Lagash (cf. Heuzey, " Cat.^" p. 121). 


Babylonia.' From IVIesilim's own inscription on the 
mace-head, we have already seen that he interested him- 
self in the repair of temples and in fostering the local cidts 
of cities in the south ; from Entemcna's record we learn 
that his activities also extended to adjusting the political 
relations betw^een tlie separate states. I'he proximity 
of Umma to Lagash brought the two cities into con- 
stant rivalry, and, although they were separated by 
the Shatt el-Hai,^ their respective territories were not 
ahvays confined to their own sides of the stream. 
During the reign of INIesilim the antagonism between 
the cities came to a head, and, in order to prevent the 
outbreak of hostilities, INIesilim stepped in as arbitrator, 
possibly at the invitation of the two disputants. The 
point at issue concerned the boundary-line between 
the territories of Lagash and Umma, and Mesilim, as 
arbitrator, drew up a treaty of delimitation. 

The form in w4iich the record of the treaty is cast is 
of peculiar interest, for it forcibly illustrates tlie theo- 
cratic feeling of these early peoples. It is in accordance 
with their point of view that the actual patesis of 
Lagash and Umma are not named, and the dispute is 
regarded as having been adjusted by the gods. The 
deity who presided over the conference, and at whose 
invitation the treaty is stated to have been made, was 
Enlil, "the king of the lands." Owing to his unique 
position among the losal gods of Babylonia, liis divine 
authority was recognized by the lesser city-gods. Thus 
it was at his command that Ningirsu, the god of Lagash, 
and the city -god of Umma fixed the boundary. It is 
true that jNlesilim, the King of Kish, is referred to by 
name, but lie only acted at the word of his own goddess 
Kadi, and his duties were confined to making a record 
of the treaty whicli the gods themselves had drawn up. 
We could not have a more striking instance of the 
manner in which the early inhabitants of Babylonia 
regarded the city-gods as the actual kings and rulers of 
their cities. The human kings and patesis were nothing 

» See the Cone of Eiitemena, "D6c. en Cliald.," p. xlvii. ; and of. 
Thureau-Dangin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," IV., pp. .37 if., and " Koni^'•sinPcllnfteIl, 
pp. 86 ff. Entemena's sketch of the early relations of Lagash and Fmnia pre- 
cedes his account of his own conquest of'the latter city ; see helow, p. 104 t. 

^ See above, pp. 11, 21 f. 


more tluiii ministers, or .agents, appointed to carry out 
their will. Thus, when one city made war upon another, 
it was because their gods were at feud ; the territory of 
the city was the property of the city-god, and, when a 
treaty of dehniitation was proposed, it was naturally 
the gods themselves who arranged it and drew up its 

We are enabled to fix approximately the period of 
IMesilim by this reference to him upon the cone of 
Entemena, but we have no such means of determining 
the date of another early ruler of the city of Kish, 
whose name has been recovered during the American 
excavations on the site of Nippur. Three fragments of 
a vase of dark brown sandstone have been found there, 
engraved with an inscription of Utug, an early patesi of 
Kish. They are said to have been found in the strata 
beneath the chambers of the great temple of Enlil on 
the south-east side of the ziggurat, or temple-tower.^ 
It would be rash to form any theory as to the date of 
the vase solely from the position in which the frag- 
ments are said to have been discovered, but the 
extremely archaic forms of the characters of the in- 
scription suggest that it dates from the earliest period 
of Babylonian history. Moreover, Utug is termed 
upon it patesi, not king, of Kish, suggesting that he 
ruled at a time when Kish had not the power and 
influence it enjoyed under JNIesilim. The hegemony 
in Sumer and Akkad constantly passed from one city 
to another, so that it is possible that Utug should be 
set after Mesilim, when the power of Kish had tem- 
porarily declined. But as the characters of Utug's 
inscription are far more archaic than those of Mesilim, 
we may provisionally set him in the period before Kish 
attained the rank of a kingdom in place of its patesiate. 
But how long an interval separated Utug from JNIesilim 
there is no means of tellino-. 

On the assumption that Utug ruled in this early 
period, we may see in the fragments of his vase from 
Nippur, evidence of the struggles by which the city of 
Kish attained the position of supremacy it enjoyed 

» See Ililpreclit, "Old Babylonian Inscriptions," Pt 11., p. G2, pi. 4G, 
No. 108 f., and Pt. I., p. 47. 





under ISIesilim. For Utiig's vase was not carried to 
Nippin- as spoil from Kish, but was deposited by Utug 
himself in the temple of Enlil, in connnemoration of a 
victory he had achieved over the land of Khamazi. 
AVe here learn the name of one of the enemies with 
whom Kish had to fight in the early stages of its 
existence as an independent city-state, and we may 
conjecture that many more such battles had to be 
fought and won before its influence was felt beyond the 
boundaries of Akkad by the Sumcrian cities in the 
south. The fact that after his victory Utug deposited 
the vase at Nippur as a thankofFering proves that in 
his time the shrine of Enlil was already regarded as tlie 
central sanctuary of Babylonia. Zamama, the god of 
Kish, had achieved the victory over Khamazi, but Enlil, 
as the supreme lord of the world, was entitled to some 
recognition and gratitude, and also probably to a share 
of the spoil. From one line of the inscription upon 
Utug's vase we may perhaps infer that his father's name 
was Bazuzu, but, as no title follows the name, he is not 
to be reckoned as a patesi of Kish. Me may thus 
conclude that Utug did not succeed his father upon the 
throne. Whether he was a usurper or succeeded some 
other relative, and whether he followed up his military 
successes by founding at Kish a powerful dynasty to 
which Mesilim may have belonged, are among the 
questions which may perhaps be answered as the result 
of future excavation in Northern Babylonia. 

It is probable that the early supremacy which Kish 
enjoyed during the reign of Mesilim continued for some 
time after his death. At any rate, the names of two 
other early rulers of that city are known, and, as they 
both bear the title of king, and not patesi, we may 
conclude that they lived during a period of the city's 
prosperity or expansion. The name of one of these 
kings, Urzage, occurs upon a broken vase of wliite 
calcite stalagmite, which was found at Nippur, approxi- 
mately in the same place as the vase of the patesi Utug.^ 
The inscription upon the vase records the fact that it 

1 See Hilprecht, op. cit., Pt. II., p. 51, pi. 43, No. 93; cf. Winckler, 
" Altorientalisclie Forschungeii," I., p. 372 f. , and Thureau-Dangin, " Konigs- 
iiischriften," p. IGO f. 


was dedicated by Urzage to Enlil, " king of the lands." 
and his consort NinHl, "the hidy of heaven and earth." 
Tlie end of tlie text is wanting, but we may conjecture 
that, hke his carher predecessor Utug, the king dedicated 
the vase in the temple of Enlil, at Nippur, in gratitude 
for some victory over his enemies. We may thus see 
in the dedication of the vase furtlier evidence of the 
continued prosperity of Kish, though it is clear that it 
only maintained its position among the other great 
cities of the land by force of arms. The name of the 
other early king of Kish, Lugal-tarsi, is known to us 
from a short inscription upon a small tablet of lapis- 
lazuli preserved in the British Museum.^ The text 
records the building of the wall of tlie enclosure, or 
outer court, of a temple dedicated to Ann and the 
goddess Ninni, but, as its provenance is unknown, it is 
impossible to base any argument upon it with reference 
to the extent of the influence exerted by Kish during 
the reign of Lugal-tarsi.^ Such are the few facts which 
have come down to us with regard to the earliest period 
of the supremacy of Kish. But the fortunes of the city 
were destined to undergo a comj^lete change, in con- 
sequence of the increase in the power of Lagash which 
took place during the reign of Eannatum. Before we 
describe the transfer of power from the north to Sumer, 
it will be necessary to retrace our steps to the point 
where we left the history of that city, during the time 
that INI esilim was ruling in the north. 

The names of the successors of lAigal-shag-engur, 
INIesilim's contemporary, upon the throne of Lagash 
have not yet been recovered, and we do not know how 
long an interval separated his reign from that of Ur- 
Nina, the early king of Lagash, from whose time so 
many inscriptions and archaeological remains have been 
recovered at Tello.^ It is possible that within this 

1 See "Cuncitorm Texts iii the British Museum," Pt. III., pi. 1, and cf. 
Thureau-Daiii^in, "^ Rev. d'Assyr.," IV., p. 74, and " Koiiiirsiiisc-hriften," 
p. IGO f. For a photograpliic reproduction of the tablet, see the plate facing 
p. 218. 

2 Since the central cult of Ninni and of Anu was at Ercch, it is possible 
that Lugal-tarsi's dedication implies the subjection of Krcch to Kish at this 

' See above, pp. 91 ff. 


period we slioiild set another ruler of T^ao-ash, named 
Badu, to whom reference appears to be made by 
Eannatiim upon tlie famous Stele of the Vultures. The 
passage occurs in the small fragment that has been 
preserved of the first column of the text engraved upon 
the stele/ the following line containing the title *' King 
of Lagash." The context of the passage is not pre- 
served, but it is possible that the signs which precede 
the title are to be taken as a proper name, and in that 
case they would give the name of an early ruler of the 
city. In fjxvour of this view we may note that in the 
text upon an archaic clay tablet found below the level 
of Ur-Nina's building at Tello - tlie name Badu occurs, 
and, although it is not there employed as that of a king 
or patesi, the passage may be taken as evidence of the 
use of Badu as a proper name in this early age. 

Assuming that Badu represents a royal name, it 
may be inferred from internal evidence furnished by 
Eannatum's inscription that he lived and reigned at 
some period before Ur-Nina. The introductory columns 
of Eannatum's text appear to give a brief historical 
summary concerning the relations which were main- 
tained between Lagash and the neighbouring city of 
Umma in the period anterior to Eannatum's own reign. 
Now the second column of the text describes the atti- 
tude of Umma to Lagash in the reign of Akurgal, 
Ur-Nina's son and successor ; it is thus a natural in- 
ference that Badu was a still earlier ruler who reigned 
at any rate before Ur-Nina. Whether he reigned before 
Lugal-shag-engur also, there are no data for deciding. 
It will be noted that Eannatum calls him " king " of 
Lagash, not " patesi," but the use of these titles by 
Eannatum, as applied to his predecessors, is not con- 
sistent, and, that he should describe Badu as " king," is 
no proof that Badu himself claimed that title. But he 
may have done so, and we may provisionally place him 
in the interval between the patesi Lugal-shag-engur and 
Ur-Nina, who in his numerous texts that have been 

* "Dri'c. en Chaldee," p. xl. ; cf. Tliureau-Dangiiij " Konigsinschriflen," 
p. 10 f. 

2 See Thureau-Dangin, " Recueil de tablettes chaldeennes," p. 1, pi. 1, 
No. 1. 


recovered always claims the title of " king " in place of 
'• j)atcsi," a fact tliat sii<>jTcsts an increase in the power 
and importance of Laoash/ To tlie same period we 
may probably assign Enkhegal, another early king of 
Lagash, whose name has been recovered on an archaic 
tablet of limestone.^ 

It is possible that Ur-Nina himself, though not a 
great soldier, did something to secure, or at least to 
maintain, the independence of his city. In any case, 
we know that he Avas the founder of his dynasty, for to 
neither his father Gunidu, nor to his grandfather Gursar, 
does he ascribe any titular rank. We may assume that 
he belonged to a powerful Sumerian family in Lagash, 
but, whether he obtained the throne by inheritance from 
some collateral branch, or secured it as the result of a 
revolt within the city, is not recorded. It is strange 
that in none of his numerous inscriptions does he lay 
claim to any conquest or achievement in the field. 
INIost of his texts, it is true, are of a dedicatory character, 
but, to judge from those of other Sumerian rulers, this 
fact should not have prevented him from referring to 
them, had he any such successes to chronicle. The 
nearest approach to a record of a military nature is that 
he rebuilt the wall of Lagash. It is therefore clear 
that, though he may not have embarked on an aggressi\'e 
policy, he did not neglect the defence of his own city. 
But that appears to have been the extent of his ambi- 
tion : so long as the fortifications of the city were intact, 
and the armed men at her disposal sufficient for the 
defence of Lagash herself and her outlying territory, he 
did not seek to add to his own renown or to the city's 
wealth by foreign conquest. The silence of Entemena 

* It has been Pug-^osled tliat the title higal, " kiii^r/' did not acquire its 
later significance until tlie age of Sai-gon (Shar-Gani-sharri), but tliat it was 
used by earlier rulers as the equivalent of the Semitic bi^lu, "lord" (cf. 
Ungnad, " (Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1!)0B, col. G4, ii. 5). But, in view of the fact 
that Mesilim bore the title, it would seem that in his time it already con- 
veyed a claim to greater authority than that inherent in the word putcsi. The 
latter title was of a jjuroly religious origin ; when borne by a ruler it desig- 
nated him as the representative of his city-god, but the title "king" was of 
a more secular character, and connoted a wider dominion. But it must be 
admitted that some inconsistencies in the use of tlie titles by members of 
Ur-Nina's dynasty seem to suggest that the distinction between them was 
not quite so marked as in the later periods. 

2 See Hilprecht, "Zeits. fiir Assyr.," XI., p. 330 f. ; and Thureau-Dangin, 
op. cit., XV., p. 403. 


with regard to the relations of Lagash to Umma at tliis 
period is not conckisive evidence tliat JNIesiHm's treaty 
was still in force, or tliat the peace he inaugurated had 
remained unbroken. But Entemena's silence fully 
accords with that of Ur-Nina himself, and we may infer 
that, in spite of his claims to the royal title, he suc- 
ceeded in avoiding any quarrel with his city's hereditary 
foe. Ur-Xina's attitude towards the city-state upon his 
own immediate borders may be regarded as typical of 
his policy as a whole. The onyx bowl which he dedi- 
cated to the goddess Ban may possibly have been part 
of certain booty won in battle,^ but his aim appears 
to have been to devote his energies to the improvement 
of his land and the adornment of his city. It is there- 
fore natural that his inscriptions ^ should consist of mere 
catalogues of the names of temples and other buildings 
erected during his reign, together with lists of the 
statues he dedicated to his gods, and of the canals he cut 
in order to increase the material wealth of his people. 

But, while Ur-Nina's policy appears to have been 
mainly of a domestic character, he did not fail to main- 
tain relations with other cities in the sphere of religious 
observance. That he should have continued in active 
communication with Nippur, as the religious centre 
of tlie whole of Babylonia, is what we might infer from 
the practice of the period, and we may probably trace 
to this fiict his dedication to Enlil of one of the canals 
which was cut during his reign. A more striking 
instance of the deference paid by Ur-Nina to the god 
of another city may be seen in his relations to Enki, 
the Sumerian prototype of the god Ea. AVhen Ur- 
Nina planned the rebuilding of the temple E-ninnu, he 
appears to have taken precautions to ensure the success 
of his scheme by making a direct appeal to Enki, the 
city-god of Eridu. On a diorite plaque that has been 
found at Tello ^ he record s the delivery of his prayer 
to Enki, that in his character of Chief Diviner he should 

^ See Heiizey, ''Rev. d'Assyr.," IV., p. 106. A fragment of a similar 
bowl, probably of the same early perioil, is definitely stated in the inscriptiou 
upon it to have been set aside for Ban as a part of certain spoil. 

2 They are collected and translated by Thureau-Dangiu, " Kciulgs- 
iuschriften," pp. 2 ff . 

^ " De'couvertes en Chaldee," p. xxxvii., No. 10. 


use his pure reed, tlie wand of his divination, to render 
the work good and should pronounce a favourable oracle. 
Tiic temple of Enki in the city of Eridu, near the shore 
of the I'crsian (4ulf, was one of the earhest and most 
sacred of Sumerian shrines, and wc may perhaps picture 
Ur-Nina as journeying thither from Lagash, in order 
to carry his petition in person into the presence of its 
mysterious gt)d. 

Of the deities of Lagash to whose service Ur-Nina 
appears especially to ha\'e devoted himself, the goddess 
Nina, whose name he bore within his own, was one 
of the most favoured. For one of the chief claims to 
distinction that he puts forward is that he built her 
temple at Lagash ; and although, unlike the later great 
builder Cxudea, he gives in his inscriptions few details 
of his work, we may conclude that he lavished his 
resources upon it. He also boasts that he made a 
statue of Nina, which he no doubt set up within her 
temjile, and one of his canals he dedicated to her. Her 
daughter Ninmar was not neglected, for he records 
that he built her temple also, and he erected a temple 
for Gatumdug, Nina's intercessor, and fashioned a 
statue of her. Another group of L^r-Nina's buildings 
was coimected with the worship of Ningirsu, the city- 
god of Lagash, whose claims a ruler, so devoted to 
tiie interests of his own city as Ur-Nina, would naturally 
not have ignored. 

A glance at his texts will show that Ur-Nina more 
than once describes himself as the builder of "the 
House of Girsu," a title by which he refers to E-ninnii, 
the great temple dedicated to Ningirsu, since it stood 
in that quarter of the city which was named Girsu 
and was by iar its most im})ortant building.^ He 
also built E-pa, a sanctuary closely coimected with 
E-ninnu and the worsliip of Ningirsu. This temple 
was added to at a later date by (ludea, Avho installed 
therein his patron god, Ningish/ida, and set the nuptial 
gifts of IJau, Ningirsu's consort, within its shrine; it 
is possible that Ur-Nina's onyx bowl, which was dedi- 
cated to Bau, and the fragments of other bowls found 

' See above, p. 90 f. OtJier divisiuiis of Lagash were Nina, Uru azagga 
and Uru. 


with it,^ were deposited by Ur-Nina in the same temple. 
Of other deities in Ningirsu's entourage, whom Ur- 
Nina singled out for special veneration, may be men- 
tioned Dunshagga, Ningirsu's son, and Uri-zi, the god 
whose duty it was to look after Ningirsu's harim. 
Among lesser temples, or portions of temples, which 
were built or restored by him was the Tirash, where 
on the day of the New j^loon's appearance it was the 
custom to hold a festival in honour of Ningirsu ; while 
another act of piety which Ur-Nina records was the 
making of a statue of Lugal-uru, the god from whose 
festival one of the Sumerian months took its name. 
In this connection, mention may also be made of the 
god Dun- . . .,^ whom Ur-Nina describes as the " God- 
king," since he stood in a peculiar relation to Ur-Nina 
and his family. He became the patron deity of the 
dynasty which Ur-Nina founded, and, down to the 
reign of Enannatum II., was the personal protector of 
the reigning king or patesi of Lagash.^ 

For the construction of his temples Ur-Nina states 
that he fetched wood from the mountains, but unlike 
Gudea in a later age, he is not recorded to have 
brought in his craftsmen from abroad. In addition 
to the building of temples, Ur-Nina's other main 
activity appears to have centred in the cutting of 
canals ; among these was the canal named Asukhur, 
on the banks of which his grandson Eannatum won 
a battle. That the changes he introduced into the 
canalization of the country were entirely successful 
may be inferred from the numerous storehouses and 
magazines, which he records he built in connection 
with the various temples,^ and by his statement that 
when he added to the temple of Ningirsu he stored 
up large quantities of grain within the temple-granaries. 

' See above, p. 107. 

* The reading of the second half of the name is uncertain. The two signs 
wliich form the name were provisionally read by Amiaud as Dun-sir (" Records 
of the Past," N.S., I., p. 59), and by Jensen as Shul-gur (cf. Schrader's " Keil- 
inschriftliche Bibliothek," Bd. 111., Hft. 1, p. 18 f.) ; see also Thureau-Dangin, 
"Rev. d'Assyr./' III., p. 119, n. 5, and Radau, "Early Bab. Hist," p. 92, 
u. 18 

^ See below, pp. IGSf., 177. 

* For a description of his principal storehouse or magazine,, the remains 
of which have been found at Tello, see above, pp. 91 flF 


In fact, from the inscriptions he has left iis, Ur-Nina 
appears as a pacific monarch devoted to tlie worship 
of his city-*rods and to the welfare of his own people. 
His ambitions lay within his own borders, and, when 
he had secured his frontier, he was content to practise 
the arts of peace. It was doubtless due to tliis wise 
and ffir-seeing policy that the resources of the city 
were husbanded, so that under his more famous grand- 
son she was enabled to repel the attack of enemies and 
embark upon a career of foreign conquest. Ur-Nina's 
posthumous fame is evidence that his reign was a 
period of peace and prosperity for Lagasli. His great- 
grandson Entemena boasts of being his descendant, 
and ascribes to him the title of King of Lagash which 
he did not claim either for himself or for his father 
Enannatum I., while even in the reign of Lugal-anda 
offerings continued to be made in connection with his 
statue in Lagash.^ 

We are not dependent solely on what we can gather 
from the inscriptions themselves for a knowledge of 
Ur-Nina. For he has left us sculptured representations, 
not only of himself, but also of his sons and principal 
officers, from which we may form a very clear picture 
of the primitive conditions of life obtaining in Sumer 
at the time of this early ruler. The sculptures take 
the form of limestone plaques, roughly carved in low 
relief with figures of Ur-Nina surrounded by his family 
and his court.^ The plaques are oblong in shape, with 
the corners slightly rounded, and in the centre of each 
is bored a circular hole. Though they are obviously 
of a votive character, the exact object for which they 
are intended is not clear at first sight. It has been, 
and indeed is still, conjectured that the plaques were 
fixed vertically to the walls of shrines,^ but this expla- 
nation has been discredited by the discovery of the 
plaque, or rather block, of Dudu, the priest of Ningirsu 
during the reign of Entemena. From tlie shape of 
the latter, the reverse of which is not flat but pyramidal, 
and also from the inscription upon it, we gather that 

* See below, p. 169. 

2 See the opposite plate and the illustrations on p. 113 f. 

3 C'f. Meyer, " Sumciicr und Soniitcn," p. 77. 





In t/iv Loiiviv; Dec. en ChaM., pi. 2 {bis). 



In the Louvre ; Jicc. en Chald., pi. 5 (bis). 


the object of these perforated bas-rehefs was to form 
horizontal supports for ceremonial niace-heads or sacred 
emblems, which were dedicated as votive offerings in the 
temples of the gods/ The great value of those of Ur- 
Nina consists in the vivid pictures they give us of 
royal personages and higli officials at this early period. 

The largest of tlie phiques ^ is sculptiu-ed with two 
separate scenes, in each of which Ur-Nina is represented 
in a different attitude and with a different occupation, 
while around him stand his sons and ministers. In 
the upper scene the king is standing ; he is nude down 
to the waist and his feet are bare, while around his 
loins he wears the rough woollen garment of the period,^ 
and upon his shaven head he supports a basket which 
he steadies with his right hand. The text engraved 
beside the king, in addition to giving his name and 
genealogy, records that he has built the temple of 
Ningirsu, the abzu-banda which was probably a great 
laver or basin intended for the temple-service, and 
the temple of Nina ; and it has been suggested that 
the king is here portrayed bearing a basket of offerings 
to lay before his god or goddess. But tlie basket he 
carries is exactly similar to those borne by labourers 
for heaping earth upon the dead as represented upon 
the Stele of the Vultures,* and baskets have always been 
used in the east by labourers and builders for carrying 
earth and other building-materials. It is therefore 
more probable that the king is here revealed in the 
character of a labourer bearing materials for the con- 
struction of the temples referred to in the text. The 
same explanation applies to the copper votive figures 
of a later period which are represented bearing baskets 
on their heads. In a similar sj)irit Gudea has left us 
statues of himself as an architect, holding tablet and 
rule ; Ur-Nina represents himself in the still more 
humble role of a labourer engaged in the actual work 
of building the temple for his god. 

' Dudu's block Avas probaWy let into solid masonry or brickwork, wliile 
the plaques of L'r-Niiia would have rested on the surface of altiirs built of 
brick ; cf. Heuzey, "Decouvertes en Chalde'e," p. 204. 

2 See the plate o[)posite p. 110. 

3 See above, p. 41 f. 

* See the plate opposite p. 138. 


Behind the king is a little figure intended for the 
royal cup-hearer, Anita, and facing him are five of his 
cliildren. It is usually held that the first of these 
fi^'ures, who bears the name of Lidda and is clothed in 
a more elaborate dress than the other four, is intended 
for the king's eldest son/ But in addition to the dis- 
tinctive dress, this figure is further differentiated from 
the others by wearing long hair m place of having the 
head shaved. In this respect it bears some resemblance 
to an archaic statuette, which appears to be that of 

a woman ; ^ and the sign attached to 
Lidda's name, engraved upon the 
stone, is possibly that for "daughter," 
not " son." It is thus not unlikely 
that we should identify the figure 
with a daughter of Ur-Nina. The 
other figures in the row are four of 
the king's sons, named Akurgal, 

Fig. 4.3. 

Early Sumerian figure 
of a woman, showing the 
Sumerian dress and the 
method of doing the hair. 

[Dec, pi. 1 tcr, No. 3.] 

Lugal-ezen, Anikurra and INluninni- 
kiu'ta. A curious point that may 
be noted is that the height of these 
figures increases as they recede from 
the king. Thus the first of the small 
figures, that of Akurgal, who suc- 
ceeded Ur-Nina upon the throne, is 
represented as smaller than his 
brothers, and it has been suggested 
in consequence that he was not the 
king's eldest son,^ a point to which 
we will return later. In the scene 
sculptured upon the lower half of the plaque the king 
is represented as seated upon a throne and raising in 
his right hand a cup from which he appears to be 
pouring a libation. We may probably see in this gioup 
a picture of the king dedicating the temple after the 
task of building was finished. The inscription records 
the fact that he had brought wood from the mountains, 
doubtless employed in the construction of the temples, 

' So, for instance, Radau, "Early IJab. History," p. 70. 

* The figure, which is in tlie Louvre, was not found at Tello, but was 
purchased at Shatra, so tliat its provenance is not certain. 

■' Sec lladau, op. cit., p. 70, and cp. (Jenouillac, '•Tablcttes sumerienues 
archaiques," p. xi. 


a detail which emphasises the difficulties lie had over- 
come. The cup-bearer who stands bcliind the throne 
is in this scene, not iVnita, but Sagantug, while the 
figure facing the king is a high official named Dudu, 
and to the left of Dudu are three more of the king's 
sons named Anunpad, INlcnudgid, and Addatiu-. 

A smaller plaque, rather more oval in shape than 
the large one figured on the plate facing p. 110, but 
like it in a perfect state of preservation, gives a similar 
scene, though witli less elaboration of detail. Accord- 
ing to its inscription this tablet also commemorates the 
building of Ningirsu's temple. Here the king carries 

Fig. 44. 

Plaque of Ur-Nina, King of Lagash (Shirpurla), sculptured with representa- 
tions of himself, his cup-bearer, Anita, and four of his sous. 

[D^c, pi. 2 bis, No. 2 ; Cat. No. 9.] 

no basket, but is represented as standing with hands 
clasped upon the breast, an attitude of humility 
and submission in the presence of his god. In other 
respects both the king and the smaller figures of his 
sons and ministers are conceived as on the larger 
plaque. A small figure immediately behind the king 
is Anita, the cup-bearer, and to the left of Anita are 
the king's son Akurgal and a personage bearing the 
name Barsagannudu. In the upper row are two other 
small figures named Lugal-ezen and Gula. Xow from 
the largest plaque we know that Lugal-ezen was a 



son of Ur-Ninu ; thus tlie absence of such a description 
from (lula and Barsagannudu is not significant, and it 
is a fair assumption that both tlicse, hke Lugal-ezen, 
were sons of tlie king. But it is noteworthy that of the 
four figures the only one that is specifically described 
as a " son " of Ur-Nina is Akurgal. 

Another of Ur-Nina's plaques is not completely 
preserved, for the riglit half is wanting upon which 

Fig. 45. 

Portion of a plaque of Ur-NinS,, King of Lagash (Shirpurla), sculptured with 
representations of his sons and the high of&cials of his court. 

[Die, pi. 2 tcr, No. 1 ; in the Imperial Ottoman Museum.] 

was the figure, or possibly two figures, of the king. On 
the portion that has been recovered are sculptured 
two rows of figures, both facing the riglit. The first 
in the lower row is Anita, tlie cup-bearer ; then 
comes a high ofhcial named Banar ; then Akurgal. 


distinguished by the title of " son," and on the extreme 
left Naniazua, the scribe. Of the four figures preserved 
in the upper row, the two central ones are Lugal-ezen 
and Muninnikurta, both of whom bear the title of 
" son," as on the largest of the three plaques. The 
reading of the names upon the figures on the right 
and left is uncertain, but they are probably intended 
for officials of the court. The one on the left of the 
line is of some interest, for he carries a staff* upon his 
left shoulder from which hangs a bag. We may 
perhaps regard him as the royal chamberlain, who 
controlled the supplies of the palace ; or his duty may 
have been to look after the provisions and accommoda- 
tion for the court, should the king ever undertake a 
journey from one city to another.^ 

While Ur-Nina's sons upon the smaller plaques are 
all roughly of the same size, we have noted that the 
similar figures upon the largest plaque vary slightly in 
height. It has been suggested that the intention of 
the sculptor was to indicate the difference in age 
between the brothers, and in consequence it has been 
argued that Akurgal, who succeeded Ur-Nina upon the 
throne of Lagash, was his fifth, and not his eldest, son. 
This inference has further been employed to suggest that 
after Ur-Nina's death there may have followed a period 
of weakness within tlie state of Lagash, due to dis- 
union among his sons ; and during the supposed struggle 
for the succession it is conjectured that the city may 
have been distracted by internal conflicts, and, in conse- 
quence, was unable to maintain her independence as a 
city-state, which she only succeeded in recovering in the 
reign of Eannatum, the son and successor of Akurgal.'^ 
But a brief examination of the theory will show that 
there is little to be said for it, and it is probable that 
the slight difference in the height of the figures is 
fortuitous and unconnected with their respective ages. 
It may be admitted that a good deal depends upon the 
sex of Lidda, who, on the largest plaque, faces the 
standing figure of Ur-Nina. If this is intended for a 
son of the king, his richer clothing marks him out as the 

' See the similar figure on a fragment of shell, illustrated ou p. 41. 
» Cf. Radau, "Early Bab. History/' p. 71. 


crown-prince ; but, even so, we may suppose that, Akur^^al 
was Ur-Nina's second son, and that lie succeeded to tlie 
tlu'one in consequence of Lidda having predeceased his 
father. IJut reasons have already been adduced for 
believing that Lidda was a daughter, not a son, of Ur- 
Nina. In that case Akurgal occupies the place of 
honour among his brothers in standing nearest the king. 
He is further differentiated from them by the cup which 
he carries ; in fact, he here appears as cup-bearer to 
IJdda, the office performed by Anita and Saguntug for 
the king. 

That the crown-prince should be here represented 
as attending his sister may appear strange, but, in view 
of our imperfect knowledge of this early period, the 
suggestion should not be dismissed solely on that 
account. Indeed, the class of temple votaries, who 
enjoyed a high social position under the Semitic kings of 
the First Dynasty of Babylon, probably had its counter- 
part at the centres of Sumerian worship in still 
earlier times ; and there is evidence that at the time of 
the First Dynasty, the order included members of the 
royal house. Moreover, tablets dating from the close 
of Ur-Nina's dynasty show the important part which 
women played in the social and official life of the early 
Sumerians.^ Thus it is possible that Ur-Nina's daughter 
held high rank or office in the temple hierarchy, and 
her presence on the plaque may have reference to some 
special ceremony, or act of dedication, in which it was 
her privilege to take the leading part after the king, or 
to be his chief assistant. In such circumstances it 
would not be unnatural for her eldest brother to attend 
her. In both the other compositions Lidda is absent, 
and Akurgal occupies tlie place of honour. In the one 
he stands on a line with the king immediately behind 
the royal cup-bearer, and he is the only royal son who is 
specifically labelled as such ; in the other he is again on 
a line with the king, separated from Anita, the cup- 
bearer, by a high officer of state, and followed by the 
royal scribe. In these scenes he is clearly set in the 
most favoured position, and, if Lidda was not his sister 
but the crown-prince, it would be hard to explain the 

' Cf. Genouillac, " Tablettes sunierieiiues arcliaiques," pp. xxii. ff. 


latter's absence, except on the supposition that his 
death had occurred before the smaller plaques were 
made. But the texts upon all three plaques record the 
building of Ningirsu's temple, and they thus appear to 
have been prepared for the same occasion, which gives 
additional weight to the suggestion that Lidda was a 
daughter of Ur-Nina, and that Akurgal was his eldest 

But, whether Akurgal was Ur-Nina's eldest son or 
not, the e\ idence of at least the smaller of the two 
complete plaques would seem to show that he was 
recognized as crown-prince during the lifetime of his 
father, and we may infer that he was Ur-Nina's imme- 
diate successor. For an estimate of his reign we must 
depend on references made to him by his two sons. It 
has already been mentioned that the early part of the text 
engraved upon the Stele of the Vultures appears to have 
given an account of the relations between Lagash and 
Umma during the reigns preceding that of Eannatum,' 
and in a badly preserved passage in the second column 
we find a reference to Akurgal, the son of Ur-Nina. 
The context is broken, but " the men of Umma " and 
" the city of Lagash " are mentioned almost immedi- 
ately before the name of Akurgal,^ and it would appear 
that Eannatum here refers to a conflict which took 
place between the two cities during the former's reign. 
It should be noted that upon his Cone^ Entemena 
makes no mention of any war at this period, and, as in 
the case of Ur-Nina's reign, his silence might be inter- 
preted as an indication of unbroken peace. But the 
narratives may be reconciled on the supposition either 
that the conflict in the reign of Akurgal was of no 
great importance, or that it did not concern the fertile 
plain of Gu-edin. It must be remembered that tlie 
text upon the Cone of Entemena was composed after 
the stirring times of Eannatum, Entemena's uncle, and 
the successes won by that monarch against Umma were 
naturally of far greater importance in his eyes than the 
lesser conflicts of his predecessors. It is true that he 
describes the still earlier intervention of Mesilim in the 

» See above, p. 105. ^ .' p^c. en C'hald^e," p. xl., Col. II. 

' Op. cit., p. xlvii. 


affairs of Lagash and Umma, but tliis is because the 
actual stele or boundary-stone set up by IMesilim was 
removed by the men of Umma in Eannatum's reign, 
an act which provoked the war. The story of 
IMesilim's intervention, which resulted in the setting 
up of the boundary-stone, thus forms a natural intro- 
duction to tlie record of Eannatum's campaign ; and 
the fact tliat tliese two events closely follow one 
another in Entemena's text is not inconsistent with 
a less important conflict being recorded by the Stele 
of the ^^ultures as having taken place in the reign of 

The only other evidence with regard to the achieve- 
ments of Akurgal is furnished by the titles ascribed to 
him by his two sons. Upon the Stele of the Vultures,^ 
Eannatum describes him as " king " of Lagash, and 
from this passage alone it might be inferred that he 
was as successful as his father Ur-Nina in maintaining 
the independence of his city. But in other texts upon 
foundation-stones, bricks, and a small column, Eannatum 
describes him only as " patesi," as also does his other son 
Enannatum I. It should be noted that in the majority 
of his inscriptions Eannatum claims for himself the title 
of patesi, and at the end of one of them, in which he 
has enumerated a long list of his own conquests, he 
exclaims, " He {i.e. Eannatum) is the son of Akurgal, 
the patesi of Lagash, and his grandfather is Ur-Nina, 
the patesi of Lagash." ^ That he should term Ur-Nina 
" patesi " does not accord with that ruler's own texts, 
but, if Eannatum himself had been merely a patesi at 
the beginning of his reign, and his father had also been 
one before him, he may well have o^'erlooked the more 
ambitious title to which his grandfather had laid claim, 
especially as this omission would enhance the splendour 
of liis own achievements. It is also possible that at 
this time the distinction between the two titles was not 
so strictly drawn as in the later periods, and that an 
alteration in them did not always mark a corresponding 
pohtical change."* However this maybe, the subsequent 
conflicts of Eannatum suggest that Lagash had failed 

» Col. II., 1. y. 2 u 1^)^;^. e,j Clial(l(^e;' p. xliii., Col. VIII. 

' See above, p. lOG, n. 1. 



to maintain her freedom. We may assume that the 
North had once more interfered in the affairs of 
Sumer, and that Kish had put an end to the com- 
parative independence which the city had enjoyed 
during Ur-Nina's reign. 



WHEN the patesiate of Lagash passed from 
Akurgal to his son Eannatum we may picture 
tlie city-state as owing a general allegiance 
to Akkad in the north. Nearer home, the relations of 
I^agash to Umma appear to have been of an amicable 
character. Whatever minor conflicts may have taken 
place between the two cities in the interval, the treaty of 
Mesilim was still regarded as binding, and its terms 
were treated with respect by both parties. The question 
whether Eannatum, like Akurgal, had liad some minor 
cause of disagreement with the men of Umma at tlie 
beginning of his reign depends upon our interpretation 
of some broken passages in the early part of the text 
engi'aved upon the Stele of the Vultures^ The second 
column deals witli the relations of Umma and Lagash 
during the reign of Akurgal, and the fourth column 
concerns the reign of Eannatum. The name of neither 
of these rulers is mentioned in the intermediate portion 
of the text, which, however, refers to Umma and 
Lagash in connection with a shrine or chapel dedicated 
to the god Ningirsu. It is possible that we have here 
a continuation of the narrative of the preceding column, 
and in that case we should assign this portion of the 
text to the reign of Akurgal, rather than to the early 
part of the reign of his successor. But it may equally 
well refer to Eannatum's own reign, and may either 
record a minor cause of dispute between the cities 
which was settled before the outbreak of the great 
war, or may perhaps be taken m connection with the 
following columns of the text. 

1 "Dt^c. en Chalde'e," p. xl. ; cf. Tluireau-Dangin, " Kouigsinscbriften," 
pp. 10 ff. 



These two columns definitely refer to Eannatum's 
reign and describe certain acts of piety which he per- 
formed in the service of his gods. They record work 
carried ont in E-ninnu, by wliich the heart of Ningirsu 
was rejoiced ; the naming and dedication of some 
portion of E-anna, the temple of the goddess Ninni ; 
and certain additions made to the sacred flocks of the 
goddess Ninkharsag. The repetition of the phrase 
referring to Xinni's temple ^ suggests a disconnected 
list of Eannatum's achievements in the service of his 
gods, rather than a connected narrative. The text in 
the fifth column continues the record of the benefits 
bestowed by him upon Ningirsu, and here we may 
perhaps trace a possible cause of the renewal of the 
war with Umma. For the text states that Eannatum 
bestowed certain territory upon Ningirsu and rejoiced 
his heart ; and, unless this refers to land occupied after 
the defeat of Umma, its acquisition may have been 
resented by the neighbouring city. Such an incident 
would have formed ample excuse for the invasion of 
the territory of Lagash by the injured party, though, 
according to the records of Eannatum himself and of 
Entemena, it would appear that the raid of the men of 
Umma was unprovoked. But, whatever may have been 
the immediate cause of the outbreak of hostilities, we 
shall see reason for believing that the war was ultimately 
due to the influence of Kish. 

The outbreak of the war between Umma and Lagash 
is recorded concisely in the sixth column of the inscrip- 
tion upon the Stele of the Vultures, which states that 
the patesi of Umma, by the command of his god, 
plundered " Gu-edin, the territory beloved of Ningirsu. 
In this record, brief as it is, it is interesting to note that 
the patesi of Umma is regarded as no more than the 
instrument of his city-god, or the minister who carries 
out his commands. As the gods in a former generation 
had drawn up the treaty between Lagash and Umma, 
which ^Nlesilim, their suzerain, had at the command of 
his own goddess engraved upon the stele of delimitation, 
so now it was the god, and not the patesi, of Umma, 

» With the loTver part of Col. IV. (pi. xl.), H. 5-8, cf. Col. V., 11. 23-29. 
^ Literally, "devoured." 


who repudiated the terms of that treaty by sending his 
army across the border. Cin edin, too, is described, not 
in its relation to the patesi of Lagash, but as the special 
property of Ningirsu, the opposing city god. We shall 
see presently that Eannatum's first act, on hearing news 
of the invasion, was quite in liarmony with the theocratic 
feeling of the time. 

The patesi who led the forces of Umma is not 
named by Eannatum upon the Stele of the Vultures, but 
from the Cone of Entemena ^ we learn that his name 
was Ush. In the siniimary of events which is given 
upon that document it is stated that Ush, patesi of 
Umma, acted with ambitious designs, and that, having 
removed the stele of delimitation which had been set 
up in an earlier age by INI esilim between the territories 
of the respective states, he invaded the plain of Lagash. 
The pitched battle between the forces of Umma and 
Lagash, which followed the raid into the latter's 
territory, is recorded by Entemena in equally brief 
terms. The battle is said to have taken place at the 
word of Ningirsu, the warrior of Enlil, and the de- 
struction of the men of Umma is ascribed not only 
to the command, but also to the actual agency, of 
Enlil himself. Here, again, we find Enlil, the god of 
the central cult of Nippur, recognized as the supreme 
arbiter of human and divine affairs. The various city- 
gods might make war on one another, but it was 
Enlil who decreed to which side victory should incline. 

In the record of the war whicli Eannatum himself 
has left us, we are furnished with details of a more 
striking character than those given in Entemena's 
brief summary. In the latter it is recorded that the 
battle was waged at the word of Ningirsu, and the 
Stele of the V^iltures amplifies this bald statement by 
describing the circumstances which attended the noti- 
fication of the divine will. On learning of the violation 
of his border by the men of Umma and the plundering 
of his territory which had ensued, Eannatum did not 
at once summon his troops and lead them in pursuit 
of the enemy. There was indeed little danger in 
delay, and no advantage to be gained by immediate 

' Col. 1., 11. 13 ff. ("D(^c. en Clialde'e," p. xlvii.). 


action. For Umma, from its proximity to I^agash, 
afforded a haven for the pkinderers M^hich they could 
reach in safety before tlie forces of Lagash could be 
called to arms. Thus Eannatum had no object in 
hurrying out his army, when there was little chance 
of overtaking the enemy weighed down witli spoil. 
Moreover, all the damage that could be done to Gu- 
edin had no doubt been done thorouglily by the men 
of Umma. In addition to carrying off JNIesilim's stele, 
they had probably denuded the pastures of all flocks 
and cattle, had trampled the crops, and had sacked 
and burnt the villages and hamlets through which 
they had passed. AVhen once they and their plunder 
were safe within their own border, they were not 
likely to repeat the raid at once. They might be 
expected to take action to protect their own territory, 
but the next move obviously lay with I^agash. In 
these circumstances Eannatum had no object in attack- 
ing before his army was ready for the field, and his 
preparations for war had been completed ; and while 
the streets of Lagash were doubtless re-echoing with 
the blows of the armourers and the tramp of armed 
men, the city-gates must have been thronged with 
eager gi'oups of citizens, awaiting impatiently the 
return of scouts sent out after the retreating foe. 
Meanwhile, we may picture Eannatum repairing to the 
temple of Ningirsu, where, having laid his complaint 
before him, he awaited the god's decision as to the 
course his patesi and his people should follow under 
the provocation to which they had been subjected. 

It is not directly stated in the text as preserved 
upon the stele that it was within E-ninnu Eannatum 
sought Ningirsu's counsel and instructions ; but we 
may assume that such was the case, since the god 
dwelt within his temple, and it was there the patesi 
would naturally seek him out. The answer of the 
god to Eannatum's prayer was conveyed to him in 
a vision ; Ningirsu himself appeared to the patesi, as 
he appeared in a later age to Gudea, when he gave 
the latter ruler detailed instructions for the rebuilding 
of E-ninnii, and granted him a sign by which he 
should know that he was chosen for the work. Like 


Gudea, Eaniuitum made liis supplication lying Hat 
upon his fjice ; and, while he was stretched out upon 
the ground, he had a dream. In his dream he beheld 
the god Ningirsu, who appeared to liim in visible form 
and came near him and stood by his head. And the 
god encouraged his patesi and promised him victory 
over his enemies. He was to go forth to battle and 
Eabbar, the Sun-god who makes the city bright, would 
advance at his right hand to assist him. Thus 
encouraged by Ningirsu, and with the knowledge that he 
was carrying out the orders of his city-god. Eannatum 
marshalled his army and set out from Lagash to attack 
the men of Umma within their own territory. 

The account of the battle is very broken upon the 
Stele of tlie Vultures,^ but sufficient details are pre- 
served to enable us to gather that it was a fierce one, 
and that victory was wholly upon the side of Lagash. 
We may conjecture that the men of Umma did not 
await Eannatum's attack behind their city-walls, but 
went out to meet him with the object of preventing 
their own fields and pastures from being laid waste. 
Every man capable of bearing arms, who was not 
required for the defence of two cities, was probably 
engaged in the battle, and the two opposing armies 
were doubtless led in person by Eannatum himself 
and by Ush, the patesi of Umma, who had provoked 
the war. The army of Lagash totally defeated the 
men of Umma and pursued them with great slaughter. 
Eannatum puts the number of the slain at three 
thousand six hundred men, or, according to a possible 
reading, thirty-six thousand men. Even the smaller 
of these figures is probably exaggerated, but there is 
no doubt that Umma suffered heavily. According to 
his own account, Eannatum took an active part in 
the fight, and he states that he raged in the battle. 
After defeating the army in the open plain, the troops 
of Lagash pressed on to Umma itself. The fortifica- 
tions had probably been denuded of their full garrisons, 
and were doubtless held by a mere handful of defenders. 
Flushed with victory the men of Lagash swept on to the 
attack, and, carrying the walls by assault, had the city 

» Obv., Col. VII. (lower part) and Col. VIII. ff. 






In the Louvre; Dec. en Chald.,pl. 3 {bisj. 


itself at their mercy. Here another shuiohtcr took 
place, and Eannatum states that within the city he 
swept all before him " like an evil storm." 

The record of his victory which Eannatum has left 
us is couched in metaphor, and is doubtless coloured by 
Oriental exaggeration ; and the scribes who drew it up 
would naturally be inclined to represent the defeat of 
Umma as even more crushing than it was. Thus the 
number of burial-mounds suggests that the forces of 
I^agash suffered heavily themselves, and it is quite 
possible the remnant of Umma's army rallied and 
made a good light within the city. But we have the 
independent testimony of Entemena's record, written 
not many years after the fight, to show that there is 
considerable truth under Eannatum's phrases ; and a 
clear proof that Umma was rendered incapable of 
further resistance for the time may be seen in the 
terms of peace which Lagash imposed. Eannatum's 
first act, after he had received the submission of the 
city, was to collect for burial the bodies of his own 
dead which strewed the field of battle. Those of the 
enemy he Avould probably leave where they fell, except 
such as blocked the streets of Umma, and these he 
would remove and cast out in the plain beyond the 
city-walls. For we may conclude that, like Entemena, 
Eannatum left the bones of his foes to be picked clean 
by the birds and beasts of prey. The monument on 
which we have his record of the fight is known as 
the Stele of the Vultures from the vultures sculptured 
upon the upper portion of it. These birds of prey are 
represented as swooping off with the heads and limbs 
of the slain, which they hold firmly in tlieir beaks and 
talons. That the sculptor should have included this 
striking incident in his portrayal of the battle is further 
testimony to the magnitude of the slaugliter which liad 
taken place. That Eannatum duly buried his own 
dead is certain, for both he and Entemena state that 
the burial-mounds which he heaped up were twenty 
in number ; and two other sculptured portions of the 
Stele of the Vultures, to which we shall presently refer, 
give vivid representations of the piling of the mounds 
above the dead. 


The fate of Ush, tlie patesi of Umma, who had 
brouf^ht such misfortune on his own city by tlie rash 
challenge he had given Lagash, is not recorded ; but 
it is clear he did not remain the ruler of Umma. He 
may have been slain in the battle, but, even if he 
survived, he was certainly deprived of his throne, 
possibly at the instance of Eannatum. For Entemena 
records the fact that it was not with Ush, but with 
a certain Enakalli, patesi of Umma, that Eannatum 
concluded a treaty of peace. ^ The latter ruler may 
have been appointed patesi by Eannatum himself, 
as, at a later day. Hi owed his nomination to Entemena 
on the defeat of the patesi Urlumma. But, whether 
this was so or not, Enakalli was certainly prepared to 
make great concessions, and was ready to accept what- 
ever terms Eannatum demanded, in order to secure the 
removal of the troops of Lagash from his city, which 
they doubtless continued to invest during the negotia- 
tions. As might be expected, the various terms of 
the treaty are chiefly concerned with the fertile plain 
of Gu-edin, which had been the original cause of the 
war. This was unreservedly restored to Lagash, or, in 
the words of the treaty, to Ningirsu, whose " beloved 
territory " it is stated to have been. In order that 
there should be no cause for future dispute with regard 
to the boundary-line separating the territory of Lagash 
and Umma, a deep ditch was dug as a permanent line 
of demarcation. The ditch is described as extending 
"from the great stream" up to Gu-edin, and with 
the great stream we may probably identify an eastern 
branch of the Euphrates, through which at this period 
it emptied a portion of its waters into the Persian Gulf. 
The ditch, or canal, received its water from the river, 
and, by surrounding the unprotected sides of Gu-edin, 
it formed not only a line of demarcation but to some 
extent a barrier to any hostile ad\'ance on the part of 

On the bank of the frontier-ditch the stele of 
JMesilim, which had been taken away, was erected 
once more, and another stele was prepared by the 
orders of Eannatum, and was set up beside it. The 

' Cone-Inscriptiou, Col. I. 11. 32 S. 


second monument was inscribed with tlie text of the 
treaty drawn up between Eannatum and Enakalh, 
and its text was probably identical with the greater 
part of that found upon the fragments of the Stele 
of the A'ultures, which have been recovered ; for the 
contents of that text mark it out as admirably suited 
to serve as a permanent memorial of the Ijoundary. 
After the historical narrative describing the events 
which led up to the new treaty, the text of the Stele 
of the Vultures enumerates in detail the divisions of 
the territory of which Gu-edin was composed. Thus 
the stele which was set up on the frontier formed in 
itself an additional security against the violation of 
the territory of T^agash. The course of a boundary- 
ditch might possibly be altered, but while the stele 
remained in place, it would serve as a final authority 
to which appeal could be made in the case of any 
dispute arising. It is probably in this way that we 
may explain the separate fields which are enumerated 
by name upon the fragment of the Stele of the A^ultures 
which is preserved in the British Museum,* and upon a 
small foundation-stone which also refers to the treaty.^ 
The fields there enumerated either made up the territory 
known by the general name of Gu-edin, or perhaps 
formed an addition to that territory, the cession of 
which Eannatum may have exacted from Umma as 
part of the terms of peace. While consenting to the 
restoration of the disputed territory, and the rectifica- 
tion of the frontier, Umma was also obliged to pay as 
tribute to Lagash a considerable quantity of gi'ain, and 
this Eannatum brought back with him to his own city. 
In connection with the formal ratification of the 
treaty it would appear that certain shrines or chapels 
were erected in honour of Enhl, Ninkharsag, Ningirsu 
and Babbar. We may conjecture that this was done in 
order that the help of these deities might be secured for 
the preservation of the treaty. According to Ente- 
mena's narrative,^ chapels or shrines were erected to 
these four deities only, but the Stele of the Vultures 

J "Cuneiform Texts in the British Museum/' Pt. VII , pi. 1 f., No. 23580. 

2 " Dec. en Chald^e," p. xliv., Galet E. 

3 Coue-Inscription^ Col. II., 11. 11-18. 


contains a series of invocations addressed not only to 
Enlil, Ninkharsag, and Babbar, but also to Enki, Enzu, 
and Ninki/ and it is probal^le that shrines were also 
erected in their honour. These were built upon the 
I'rontier beside the two stelae of delimitation, and it 
was doubtless at the altar of each one of them in turn 
that Eannatum and Enakalli took a solemn oath to 
abide by the terms of the treaty and to respect the 
frontier. The oaths by which the treaty was thus 
ratified are referred to upon the Stele of the \''ultures'^ 
by Eannatum, who invokes each of the deities by whom 
he and Enakalli swore, and in a series of striking 
formulae calls down destruction upon the men of Unmia 
should they violate the terms of the compact. " On 
the men of Umma," he exclaims, " have I, Eannatum, 
cast the great net of Enlil ! I have sworn the oath, 
and the men of Umma have sworn the oath to Eannatum. 
In the name of Enlil, the king of heaven and earth, in 
the field of Ningirsu there has been . . . , and a ditch 
has been dug down to the water le\'el. . . . ^^'ho from 
among the men of Umma by his word or by his . . . 
will go back upon the word (that has been given), and 
will dispute it in days to come ? If at some future time 
they shall alter this word, may the great net of Enlil, by 
whom they have sworn the oath, strike Umma down ! " 
Eannatum then turns to Ninkharsag, the goddess of 
the Sumerian city of Kesh, and in similar phrases 
invokes her wrath upon the men of Umma should they 
violate their oath. He states that in his wisdom he 
has presented two doves as offerings before Ninkharsag, 
and has performed other rites in her honour at Kesh, 
and turning again to the goddess, he exclaims, " As 
concerns my mother, Ninkharsag, who from among the 
men of Umma by his word or by his . . . will go back 
upon the word (that has been given), and will disjjute 
it in days to come? If at some future time they shall 
alter this word, may the great net of Ninkharsag, Ly 
whom they haxe swoin the oath, strike Umma dowji ! " 
Enki, tlie god of tlie abyss of waters beneath the earth, 
is the next deity to be invoked, and before him Eannatum 

> Cf. Obv., Col. XIX.-XXII., and Rev., Col. lII.-\'. 
a Obv., Col. XVI.— Rev., Col. V. 


records that he presented certain fish as offerings ; his 
net Eannatum has cast over the men of Umiiia, and 
should they cross the ditch, he prays that destruction 
may come upon Umma by its means. Enzu, the 
Moon-god of Ur, whom Eannatum describes as "the 
strong bull-calf of Enlil," is then addressed ; four doves 
were set as offerings before him, and he is in^•okcd to 
destroy Umma with his net, should the men of that 
city ever cross Ningirsu's boundary, or alter the course 
of the ditch, or carry away the stele of delimitation. 
Before Babbar, the Sun-god, in his city of Larsa, 
Eannatum states that he has offered bulls as offerings, 
and his great net, which he has cast over the men of 
Umma, is invoked in similar terms. Finally, Eannatum 
prays to Ninki, by whom the oath has also been taken, 
to punish any violation of the treaty by wiping the 
might of Umma from off the face of the earth. 

The great stele of Eannatum, from the text upon >- 
which we have taken much of the description of his '^ 
war with Umma, is the most striking example of early 
Sumerian art that has come down to us, and the 
sculptures upon it throw considerable light upon the 
customs and beliefs of this primitive race. The meta- 
phor of the net, for example, which is employed by 
Eannatum througliout the curses he calls down upon 
Umma, in the event of any violation of the treaty, is 
strikingly illustrated by a scene sculptured upon two 
of the fragments of the stele which have been recovered. 
When complete, the stele consisted of a large slab 
of stone, curved at the top, and it was sculptured and 
inscribed upon both sides and also upon its edges. Up 
to the present time seven fragments of it have been 
recovered during the course of the excavations at Tello, 
of which six are in the Louvre and one is in tlie British 
Museum ; these are usually distinguished by the symbols 
A to G.^ Althou^jjh the fratrnients thus recovered 

• The fragments A-F have been publi>she(l in " Dec. eu ChaUlee " on the 
foHowing plates : Plate 4, A, B, and C, Obverse (it should be noterl that on 
the plate the letters B and should be interchanged) ; Plate 3, A, B, and C, 
Reverse (the letters B and C are here placed correctly) ; I'late 4 (liis), D and 
E, Obverse ; Plate 3 (bis), D and E, Reverse ; Plate 4 (ter). F, Ol.verse and 
Reverse. The fragment G. which connects C with F, is published in " Cuu. 
Texts in the Brit. Mus.," Pt MI., pi. 1. 



represent but a small proportion of the original monu- 
ment, it is possible from a careful study of them to 
form a fairly complete idea of the scenes that were 
sculptured upon it. As we have already noted, the 
monument was a stele of victory set up by Eannatum, 
and the two faces of the slab are sculptured in low 
relief with scenes illustrating the victory, but differing 
considerably in character. On the face the representa- 
tions are mythological and religious, while on the back 
they are historical. It might very naturally be sup- 
posed that the face of the stele would have been 
occupied by representations of Eannatum himself 
triumphing over his enemies, and, until the text upon 
the stele was thoroughly deciphered and explained, this 
was indeed the accepted opinion. But it is now clear 
that Eannatum devoted the front of the stele to repre- 
sentations of his gods, while the reverse of the monu- 
ment was considered the appropriate place for the 
scenes depicting the patesi and his army carrying out 
the divine will. The arrangement of the reliefs upon 
the stone thus forcibly illustrates the belief of this early 
period that the god of the city was its real ruler, whose 
minister and servant the patesi was, not merely in 
metaphor, but in actual fact. 

Upon the largest portion of the stele that has been 
recovered, formed of two fragments joined together,^ we 
have the scene which illustrates Eannatum's metaphor 
of the net. Almost the whole of this portion of the 
monument is occupied with the figure of a god, which 
appears of colossal size if it is compared with those of 
the patesi and his soldiers upon the reverse of the stele. 
The god has flowing hair, boimd with a double fillet, 
and, while cheeks and lips are shaved, a long beard falls 
in five undulating curls from the chin upon the breast. 
He is nude to the waist, around which he wears a 
close-fitting garment with two folds in front indicated 
by double lines. It was at first suggested that we 

' These are known by the symbols D and E ; see p. 131, Fig. 46. In 
the course of its transport from Telle to Constantinople the upper part of 
fragment D was unfortunately damaged, so tliat the god's brow, and liis eye, 
and the greater part of his nose are now wanting (see " Dec. en Chaldee," 
pi. 4 bis). In the block the missing portions have been restored from a 
squeeze of the fragment taken at Tello by M. de Sarzec (of. " Dec," p. 104 f.). 


should see in tliis figure a representation of some early 
hero, such as Gilgainesli, but there is no doubt tliat we 

should identify him witli 
Lagash. For in his 


Ningirsu, the 
hand the 


city-god of 
holds tlie 

emblem of Lagash, the eagle with outspread wings, 
clawing the heads of two lions ; and the stele itself^ 
while indirectly perpetuating Eannatum's fame, was 
essentially intended to commemorate victories achieved 
by Ningirsu over his city's enemies. This fact will also 
explam the rest of the scene sculptured upon the lower 

Fig. 46. 

Part of the Stele of the Vultures, sculptured with a scene representing 
Ningirsu clubbing the enemies of Lagash (Shirpurla), whom he has caught in 
his net. 

[Fragments D and E, Obverse ; D^c, pi. i bis,] 

fragment. For the god grasps in his right hand a 
heavy mace, which he lets fall upon a net in front of 
him containing captive foes, whose bodies may be seen 
between its broad meshes struggling and writhing within 
it. On the relief the cords of the net are symmetrically 
arranged, and it apparently rises as a solid structure to 
the level of the god's waist. It thus has the appearance 
of a cage with cross-bars and supjDorts of wood or metal. 
But the rounded corners at the top indicate that we 


may regard it as a net formed of ropes and cordage. 
That it should rise stiffly before tlie god may be partly 
due to the imperfect knowledge of perspective chara(;ter- 
istic of all early art, partly perhaps to the desire of the 
sculptor to allow the emblem of Lagash, grasped in 
the god's left hand, to rest upon it ; unless indeed the 
emblem itself is a part of the net, by means of which 
the god is holding it up. In any case the proximity of 
the emblem to the net is not fortuitous. Within the 
net are the foes of Lagash, and with the mace in his 
right hand Ningirsu is represented as clubljing the 
head of one of them which projects from between the 

The metaphor of the net, both of the fisherman and 
the fowler, is familiar in the poetical literature of the 
Hebrews, and it is interesting to note this very early 
example of its occurrence among the primitive Sumerian 
inhabitants of Babylonia.^ In the text engraved upon 
the Stele of the Vultures Eannatum, as we have already 
seen, seeks to guard the terms of his treaty by placing 
it under the protection of the nets of Enlil and of other 
deities. He states that he has cast upon the men of 
Umma the nets of the deities by whom he and they 
have sworn, and, in the event of any violation of their 
oath, he prays that the nets may destroy them and their 
city.^ Thus the meshes of each net may in a sense be 
regarded as the words of the oath, by the utterance of 
which they have placed themselves within the ])ower of 
the god whose name they have invoked. But the scene 
on the front of the stele is not to be regarded as directly 
referring to this portion of the text, nor is the colossal 
figure that of Enlil, the chief god of Babylonia. For 
his destruction of the men of Umma is merely invoked 
as a possible occurrence in the future, while the god on 
the stele is already engaged in clubbing captives he has 
cauglit ; and, whether the net of Ningirsu was referred 
to in a missing portion of the text or not, the fact that 
the figure on the stele grasps the emblem of Eagash is 

* Cf. lleuzoy, "Rev. d'Assyr.," III., p. 10. Its first adoption by the 
Semites is seen on the recently discovered monument of Sliarru-Gi, an early 
kin^ of Kish ; see below, Cliap. \'III., p. 220 f. 

- See above, p. 128 f. 


sufficient indication that Ningirsu and not Knlil, nor 
any other deity, is intended. Thus the face of the stele 
iUustrates the text of Ennnatuni as a ^vll()le. not merely 
the imprecatory formulae attached to tiie treaty with 
Umma. It refers to the past \ictories of Ningirsu in 
his character as the city-god of I^agash. 

The representation of Ningirsu clubbing his enemies 
forms only a portion of a larger scheme which occupied 
the whole of the upper part of the Stele of the \'^ultures. 
Though his is the principal figure of the composition, it 
is not set in the centre of the field but on the extreme 
right, the right-hand edge of the fragments illustrated 
on p. 131 representing the actual edge of the stele. On 
the left behind the god and standing in attendance upon 
him was a goddess, parts of whose head and headdress 
have been reco\'ered upon a fragment from tlie left edge 
of the stele.^ She wears a horned crown, and behind 
her is a standard surmounted by an emblem in the form 
of an eagle with outspread wings. She is sculptured on 
a smaller scale than the figure of Ningirsu, and thus 
serves to indicate his colossal proportions ; and she 
stood on a fillet or lintel, which cuts off the upper 
register from a second scene which was sculptured 
below it. The fragment of the stele in the British 
JSIuseum ^ preserves one of Ningirsu's feet and a corner 
of the net with the prisoners in it, and both are rejjre- 
sented as resting on the same fillet or lintel. This 
fragment is a piece of some importance, for, by joining 
two other pieces of the stele in the Louvre,^ it enables 
us to form some idea of the scene in the lower register. 
Here, too, we have representations of deities, but they 
are arranged on a slightly different plan. We find 
upon the fragment from the right of the stele (C) part 
of the head and headdress of a goddess very like that in 
the register above. Here she faces to the left, and on 
another fragment (F), which joins the British Museum 
fragment upon the left, is a portion of a very com- 
plicated piece of sculpture. This has given rise to 

1 The fragment is known as B ; "Dec. en Chaldee," pi. 4 (see above, 
p. 129, n. 1). For her headdress, see above, p. 61, Fig. 18. 

^ Fragment G ; see above, p. 129, n 1. 

2 Fragments C and F ; see above, p. 129, n. 1. 


many conjectures, but there appears to be little doubt 
that it represents the forepart of a chariot. We have 
the same cin-ved front which is seen in the chariot of 
Eannatum upon the reverse of the stele, and the same 
arranf^ement of the reins which pass through a double 
ring fixed in the front of the chariot and are liitched 
over a high support. Here the support and the front of 
the chariot are decorated Avith a form of the emblem of 
Lagash, tlie spread eagle and the lions, and we may 
therefore conclude that the chariot is that of Ningirsu ; 
indeed, on the left of the fragment a part of the god's 
plain garment may be detected, similar to that which 
he wears in the upper register. He is evidently stand- 
ing in the chariot, and we may picture him riding in 
triumph after the destruction of his foes. 

A close analogy may thus be traced between the 
two scenes upon the front of the stele and the two upper 
registers upon the back. In the latter we have repre- 
sentations of Eannatum on foot leading his warriors to 
battle, and also riding victoriously in a chariot at their 
head. On the front of the stele are scenes of a similar 
character in the religious sphere, representing Ningirsu 
slaying the enemies of Lagash, and afterwards riding in 
his chariot in triumph. It may also be noted that the 
composition of the scenes in the two registers upon the 
face of the stone is admirably planned. In the upper 
register the colossal figure of Ningirsu with his net, upon 
the right, is balanced below on the left by his figure in 
the chariot ; and, similarly, the smaller figure or figures 
above were balanced by the ass that drew Ningirsu's 
chariot, and the small figure of a goddess who faces 

There are few indications to enable us to identify 
the goddesses who accompany Ningirsu. If the figures 
in both registers represent the same divine personage 
the names of several goddesses suggest themselves. 
A\^e might, perhaps, see in her Ningirsu's wife Bau, the 
daughter of Anu, or his sister Nina, the goddess of the 
oracle, to whose service Eannatum was specially 
devoted, or Gatumdug, the mother of Lagash. But 
the military standard which accompanies the goddess in 
the upper scene, and the ends of two darts or javelins 


which appear in the same fragment to rise from, or be 
bound upon, her shoulders, seem to show that the upper 
goddess, at any rate, is of a warhke character. JNlore- 
over, in another inscription, Eannatum ascribes a success 
he has achieved in war to the direct intervention of the 
goddess Ninni/ proving that she, Uke the later liaby- 
lonian and Assyrian goddess Ishtar, was essentially the 
goddess of battle. It is permissible, therefore, to see in 
the upper goddess, sculptured upon the face of the Stele 
of the Vultures, a representation of Nimii, the goddess 
of battle, who attends the city-god Ningirsu while he is 
engaged in the slaughter of his foes. In the lower 
register it is possible we have a second representation of 
Ninni, where she appears to w^elcome Ningirsu after the 
slaughter is at an end. But though the headdresses of 
the two goddesses are identical, the accompanying 
emblems appear to differ, and we are thus justified in 
suggesting for the lower figure some goddess other than 
Ninni, whose work was finished when Ningirsu had 
secured the victory. The deity most fitted to gladden 
Ningirsu's sight on his return would have been his 
faithful wife Bau, who was w^ont to recline beside her 
lord upon his couch within the temple E-ninnu. W^e 
may thus provisionally identify the goddess of the lower 
register with Bau, who is there portrayed going out to 
meet the chariot of her lord and master upon his return 
from battle. 

Perhaps the scenes which are sculptured upon the 
back of the Stele of the Vultures are of even greater 
interest than those upon its face, since they afford us 
a picture of these early Sumerian peoples as they 
appeared when engaged in the continual wars whicli 
were waged between the various city-states. I^ike the 
scenes upon the face of the stele, those upon the t)a('k 
are arranged in separate registers, divided one from the 
other by raised bands, or lillets, stretching across the face 
of the monument and representing the soil on which 
the scenes portrayed above them took place. The 
registers upon the back are smaller than those on the 
face, being at least four in number, in place of the two 
scenes which are devoted to Ningirsu and his attendant 

» " Dec. en Chaldee," p. xliii., Galet A, Col. V. f. 


deities. As might be expected, the scenes upon the 
back of the stele are on a smaller scale than those upon 
the face, and the number and variety of the figures 
composing them are far greater. Little space has been 
left on the reverse of the stone for the inscription, the 
greater part of v.hich is engraved on the front of the 
mommient, in the broad spaces of the field between 
the divine figures. Of the highest of the four registers 
upon the reverse four fragments have been recovered,^ 
one of which {A) proves that the curved head of the 
stele on this side was filled with the representations oi 
vultures, to which reference has already been made.^ The 
intention of the sculptor was clearly to represent them 
as flying thick in the air overhead, bearing off from the 
field of battle the severed heads and limbs of the slain. 
The birds thus formed a very decorative and striking 
feature of the monument, and the popular name of the 
stele, which is derived from them, is fully justified. In 
the same register on the left is a scene representing 
Eannatum leading his troops in battle,^ and we there 
see them advancing over the bodies of the slain ; while 
from the extreme right of the same register we have a 
fragment representing men engaged in collecting the 
dead and piling them in heaps for burial.* We may con- 
iecture that the central portion of the register, which is 
missing, portrayed the enemies of Eannatum falling 
before his lance. In the register immediately below we 
find another representation of Eannatum at the head of 
his troops. Here, however, they are not in battle array 
but on the march, and Eannatum, instead of advancing 
on foot, is riding before them in his chariot.^ 

The sculptured representations of Eannatum and 
his soldiers, which are preserved upon these fragments, 
are of the greatest importance, for they give a vivid 
picture of the Sumerian method of fighting, and supply 
detailed information with regard to the arms and 
armour in use at this early period. We note that the 

' Tliese are numltered A, D (vvLich is joined to E), and B ; see above, 
p. 129, n. 1. 

2 See above, p. 1 25. 

^ See the plate facing p. 124. 

* Fi-apment B, Reverse (see above, p. 120, n. 1). 

* See the plate facing p. 124 


Siimerians advanced to the attack in a solid phalanx, 
the leading rank being protected by huge shields or 
bucklers that covered the whole body from the neck to 
the feet, and were so broad that, when lined up in battle 
array, only enough space was left for a lance to be 
levelled between each ; the lance-bearers carried as an 
additional weapon an axe, resembling an adze with a 
flat head. From the second register, in which we see the 
army on the march, it is clear that no shield was carried 
by the rank and file for individual protection ; the huge 
bucklers were only borne by men in the front rank, and 
they thus served to protect the whole front of an attack- 
ing force as it advanced in solid formation. In the scene 
in the upper register two soldiers are sculptured behind 
each shield, and in each gap between the shields six 
lances are levelled which are gi-asped firmly in both hands 
by the soldiers wielding them. The massing of the 
lances in this fashion is obviously a device of the sculptor 
to suggest six rows of soldiers advancing one behind 
the other to the attack. But the fact that each lance is 
represented as grasped in both hands by its owner proves 
that the shields were not carried by the lance-bearers 
themselves, but by soldiers stationed in the front, armed 
only with an axe. The sole duty of a shield-bearer 
during an attack in phalanx was clearly to keep his 
shield in position, which was broad enough to protect 
his own body and that of the lance-bearer on his right. 
Thus the representation of two soldiers behind each 
buckler on the Stele of the Vultures is a perfectly 
accurate detail. As soon as an attack had been success- 
fully delivered, and the enemy was in flight, the shield- 
bearers could discard the heavy shields they carried and 
join in the pursuit. The light axe with which they 
were armed was admirably suited for hand-to-hand 
conflicts, and it is probable that the lance-bearers them- 
selves abandoned their heavy weapons and had recourse 
to the axe when they broke their close formation. 

Both Eannatum and his soldiers wear a conical 
helmet, covering the brow and carried down low at the 
back so as to protect the neck, the royal helmet being 
distinguished by the addition at the sides of moulded 
pieces to protect the ears. Both the shields and the 


lielmets were proba})ly of leather, tliough the nine 
circiihir bosses on the tace of each of the former may 
possibly have been of metal. Their use was clearly to 
strengthen the shields, and they were probably attached 
to a wooden framework on the other side. 'I'hey would 
also tend to protect the surface of the shields by deflect- 
ing blows aimed at them. The royal wea})ons consisted 
of a long lance or spear, wielded in the leit hand, and a 
curved mace or throwing-stick, formed of three strands 
bound together at intervals with thongs of leather or 
bands of metal. When in his chariot on the march, the 
king was furnished with additional weapons, consisting 
of a flat-headed axe like those of his soldiers, and a 
number of light darts, some fitted with double points. 
These last he carried in a huge quiver attached to the 
fore part of his chariot, and with them we may note a 
double-thonged whip, doubtless intended for driving 
the ass or asses that drew the vehicle. It is probable 
that the soldiers following Eannatum in both scenes 
were picked men, who formed the royal body-guard, for 
those in the battle-scene are distinguished by the long 
hair or, rather, wig, that falls upon their shoulders from 
beneath their helmets,^ and those on the march are seen 
to be clothed from the waist downwards in the rough 
woollen garment similar to that worn by the king. 
They may well have been recruited among the members 
of the royal house and the chief families of Lagash. 
The king's apparel is distinguished from theirs by the 
addition of a cloak, possibly of skin,^ worn over the 
left shoulder in such a way that it leaves the right arm 
and shoulder entirely free. 

Considerable light is thrown upon the burial customs 
of the Sumerians by the scene sculptured in the third 
register, or section, on the reverse of the stele of 
Eannatum. Portions of the scene are preserved upon 
the fragments C and F, which we have already noted 
may be connected with each other by means of the 
fragment G, preserved in the l^ritish Museum. In 
this register we have a representation of the scenes 
following the victory of Eannatum, when the king and 
his army had time to collect their dead and bury them 

^ See above, p. 43. * See above, p. 42, n. 1. 



In the Loufrc: photo, by Messrs. Mansell 6r Co. 


with solemn rites and sacrifices beneath liuge tells or 
biirial-moiinds. It will be remembered that a fragment 
of tlie top register portrays tlie collection of the dead 
upon the battlefield ; here, on tlie left, we see tlie 
mounds in course of construction, under which the dead 
were buried.^ The dead are quite nude, and are seen 
to be piled up in rows, head to head and feet to feet 
alternately. The two corpses at the base are sculj)- 
tured lying flat upon the ground, and, as the tell rises, 
they appear to be arranged Uke the sticks of a fan. 
This arrangement was doubtless due to the sculptor's 
necessity of filling the semi-circular head of the tell, and 
does not represent the manner in which the corpses 
w^ere actually arranged for burial. We may conclude 
that they were set out symmetrically in double rows, and 
that the position of every one was horizontal, additional 
rows being added until sufficient height had been 

Two living figures are sculptured on the fragment, 
engaged in the work of completing the burial. They 
are represented as climbing the pile of corpses, and 
they seem to be helping themselves up by means of a 
rope which they grasp in their right hands. On their 
heads they carry baskets piled up with earth, which 
they are about to throw upon the top of the mound. 
In the relief they appear to be climbing upon the limbs 
of the dead, but it is probable that they began piling 
earth from below and climbed the sides of the mound 
as it was raised. The sculptor has not seen how to 
represent the sides of the tell without hiding his corpses, 
so he has omitted the piled earth altogether, unless, 
indeed, what appears to be a rope which the carriers 
hold is really intended for the side of the mound in 
section. It has been suggested that the carriers are 
bearing offerings for the dead, but the baskets appear 
to be heaped with earth, not offerings, and the record 
in the text upon the stele, that Eannatum piled up 
twenty burial-mounds after his battle with the men of 
Umma, is sufficient justification for the view that the 
scene represents one of these mounds in course of 

* Fragment C, Reverse ; see the plate facing p. 138. 


Tlie continuation of the scene upon the other two 
fnignients/ proves that tlie biirial of the dead was 
attended with elaborate funeral rites, and the offering 
of sacrifices. To the right of the workers engaged in 
piling up the burial-mound may be seen a bull lying 
on his back upon the ground, and bound securely with 
ropes to two stout stakes driven into the soil close to 
its head and tail. He is evidently the victim, duly 
prepared for sacrifice, that will be offered when the 
burial-mound has been completed. In the field above 
the bull are sculptured other victims and offerings, 

Fig. 47. 

Part of the Stele of the Vultures, sculptured with a sacrificial scene which 
took place at the burial of the dead after battle. The fragment represents the 
head of a bull, which is staked to the ground and prepared for sacrifice. The 
foot and robe probably belonged to a figure of Eannatum, who presided at the 
funeral rites. 

[Fragment F, Reverse ; D^c, pi. 4 ter.] 

which were set out beside the bull. We see a row of 
six lambs or kids, decapitated, and arranged symmetri- 
cally, neck to tail, and tail to neck. Two large water- 
pots, with wide mouths, and tapering towards the base, 
stand on the right of the bull ; palm-branches, placed 
in them, droop down o\er their rims, and a youth, 
completely nude, is pouring water into one of them 
from a smaller vessel. He is evidently poin-ing out a 
libation, as we may infer from a similar scene on another 
early Sumerian relief that has been recovered.^ Beyond 

' llie remains of this scene upon fragmei^t V are figured in the text ; foi 
the fragment G, see "C'uii. Texts in the Hrit. Mas.," Pt. VII., pi. 1. 
* See above, p. f!H, Fig. 20. 


the large vessels there appear to be bundles of faggots, 
and in the field above them are sculptured a row of 
growing plants. These probably do not rise from the 
large vessels, as they appear to do in the sculpture, but 
form a separate row beyond the faggots and the vessels. 
At the head of the bull may be seen the foot and part 
of the robe of a man who directs the sacrifice. As in 
all the other registers upon the reverse of the stele 
Eannatum occupies a prominent position, we may con- 
clude that this is part of the figure of Eannatum 
himself. He occupies the centre of the field in this 
register, and presides at the funeral rites of the warriors 
who have fallen in his service. 

Of the last scene that is preserved upon the Stele 
of the Vultures very little remains upon the fragments 
recovered, but this is sufficient to indicate its character. 

Fig. 48. 
Part of the Stele of the Vultures, which was sculptured with a poene repre- 
senting Eannatum deciding the fate of prisoners taken in battle. The point of 
the spear, which he grasped in his left hand, touches the head of the captive 
king of Kish. 

[Fragments C and F, Reverse ; D^c, pi. 3 and 4 ter.] 

Eannatum was here portrayed deciding the fate of 
prisoners taken in battle. Of his figure only the left 
liand is preserved ; it is grasping a heavy spear or 
lance by the end of tlie shaft as in the second register. 
The spear passes over the shaA'en heads of a row of 
captives, and at the end of the row its point touches 
the head of a prisoner of more exalted rank, who faces 
the king and raises one hand in token of submis.sion. 
A fragment of inscription behind the head of this 
captive gives the name '' Al-[ . . . ], King of Kish," 
and it may be concluded with considerable probability 
that these words form a label attaclied to the figure 
of the chief prisoner, like the labels engraved near the 
head of Eannatum in the two upper registers, wliich 
describe liini as "Eannatum, champion of the god 
Ningirsu." There is much more to be said for this 


explanation than for the possibility that the words 
formed part of an account of a war waged by Eannatum 
against Kish, which has been added to the record 
of his war with Umma. According to such a view 
the stele must have been larger than we have supposed, 
since it would have included additional registers at 
the base of the reverse for recording the subsequent 
campaigns and their illustration by means of reliefs. 
The monument would thus have been erected to 
commemorate all the wars of Eannatum. But that 
against Umma would be the most important, and its 
record, copied directly from the text of the treaty, 
would still occupy three quarters of the stone. More- 
over, we should have to suppose that the scribe slavishly 
copied the text of the stele of delimitation even down 
to its title, and made no attempt to assimilate with 
it the later records, which we must assume he added 
in the form of additional paragraphs. Such a sup- 
position is extremely imlikely, and it is preferable to 
regard the words behind the prisoner's head as a label, 
and to conclude that the connected text of the stele 
ended, as it appears to do, with the name and descrip- 
tion of the stone, which is engraved as a sort of 
colophon upon the upper part of the field in the fourth 

According to this alternative we need assume the 
existence of no registers other than those of which we 
already possess fragments, and the conception and 
arrangement of the reliefs gains immensely in unity 
and coherence. On the obverse we have only two 
registers, the upper one rather larger than the one 
below, and both devoted, as we have seen, to repre- 
sentations of Ningirsu and his attendant goddesses. 
The reverse of the stone, divided into four registers, 
is assigned entirely to Eannatum, svho is seen leading 
his troops to the attack, returning in his chariot from 
the field of battle, performing funeral rites for his dead 
soldiers, and deciding the fate of captives he has taken. 
Thus the reliei's admirably illustrate the description of 
the war with Umma, and we may conclude that the 
Stele of the Vultures was either the actual stele of 
delimitation set up by Eannatum upon the frontier. 


or, as is more probable, an exact copy of its text, 
embellished with sculptures, upon a stone which Ean- 
natum caused to be carved and set up within his own 
city as a memorial of his conquest. Indeed, we may 
perhaps make the further assumption that the stele 
was erected within the temple of Ningirsu, since it 
commemorates the recovery of Gu-edin, the territory 
that was pecuharly his own. The Stele of the Vultures, 
with its elaborate and delicate relief, would have been 
out of place upon the frontier of Gu-edin, where, we 
may conjecture, the memorial stone would have been 
made as strong and plain as possible, so as to offer 
little scope for mutilation. But, if destined to be set 
up within the shelter of Ningirsu's temple in Lagash, 
the sculptor would have had no restriction placed upon 
his efforts ; and the prominent place assigned to 
Ningirsu in the reliefs, upon the face of the memorial, 
is fully in keeping with the suggestion that the Stele 
of the Vultures at one time stood within his slirine. 

In favour of the view that the monument was not 
the actual stele of delimitation we may note that towards 
tlie close of its text some four columns were taken up 
with lists of other conquests achieved by Eannatum. 
But in all " kudurru-inscriptions," or boundary-stones, 
which were intended to safeguard the property or 
claims of private individuals, tlie texts close with a 
series of imprecations calling down the anger of the 
gods upon any one infringing the owner's rights in any 
way. Now in general character the text upon the 
Stele of the Vultures closely resembles the *' kudurru- 
inscriptions," only differing from them in that it sets 
out to delimit, not the fields and estates of individuals, 
but the respective territories of two city-states. ^Ve 
should therefore expect that, like them, it would close 
with invocations to the gods. JNIoreover, the Cone of 
Entemena, the text of which was undoubtedly copied 
from a similar stele of delimitation, ends with curses, 
and not with a list of Entemena's own achievements. 
But if the short list of Eannatum's titles and conquests 
be omitted, the text upon the Stele of the Vultures 
would end with the series of invocations to Enlil and 
other deities, to which reference has already been made. 


We may therefore conclude that the original text, as 
engra\ed upon the stele of delimitation, did end at 
this point, and that the list of other conquests was 
only added upon the memorial erected in Ningirsu's 

Apart from the interest attaching to the memorial 
itself, this point has a bearing upon the date of the 
conquest of Umma in relation to the other successful 
wars conducted by Eannatinii in the course of his 
reign. It might reasonably be vn-ged that the sub- 
jugation of the neighbouring city of Umma would 
have preceded the conquest of more distant lands and 
cities, over which Eannatum succeeded in imposing 
his sway. In that case we must assume that the list 
of conquests upon the Stele of the Vultures was added 
at a later date. On the other hand, it is equally possible 
that the war with Umma took place well on in Ean- 
natum's reign, and that, while the patesi and his army 
were away on distant expeditions, their ancient rival 
Umma refrained from taking advantage of their absence 
to gain control of the coveted territory of Gu-edin. 
Both cities may for years have respected the terms of 
Mesilim's treaty, and Lagash, while finding scope 
elsewhere for her ambition, may have been content 
to acquiesce in the claims of independence put forward 
by her nearest neighbour. Thus the list of Eannatum's 
conquests may well have been engraved upon the Stele 
of tlie Vultures at the time the treaty with Umma was 
drawn up. In accordance with this view we shall see 
there are reasons for believimj that several of Eannatum's 
conc[uests did take place before his war with Umma, 
and it is quite possible to assign to this earlier period 
the others that are mentioned in the list. 

The conquest of Kish stands in close relation to 
that of Umma, for, apart from the portrayal of the 
king of Kish as a captive upon the Stele of the Vultures, 
there is a passage in the main body of the inscription 
which would seem to connect the outbreak of war 
between Umma and Lagash with the influence of that 
city. In the broken passage recording the encourage- 
ment given to Eannatum by Xingirsu after the raid of 
Gu-edin, the names of Umma and Kish occur together, 


and the context of the passage suggests tliat Ningirsu 
here promises his patesi victory over both these cities.* 
We may, therefore, conjecture tliat the anil^itious designs 
described by Entemena as actuating Ush, the patesi of 
Umma, in raiding the territory of I^agash, were fostered 
by the city of Kish. It is probable that Eannatum had 
already given proof of his qualities as a military leader, 
and had caused the king of Kish to see in Lagash a 
possible rival for the hegemony which the North had 
long enjoyed. To sow dissension between her and 
her neighbour Umma, would have appeared a most 
effective method of crippling her growing power, and 
it is possible that the lang of Kish not only promised 
his support, but furnished a contingent of his own 
soldiers to assist in the attack. The representation of 
the captive king of Kish upon the Stele of the Vultures 
may possibly be interpreted as proving that he led his 
troops in person, and was captured during the battle. 
But the relief is, perhaps, not to be taken too literally, 
and may merely symbohze the defeat of his forces along 
with those of Umma, and his failure to render them 
any effective aid. On the other hand, in a text en- 
graved upon one of his foundation-stones,^ Eannatum 
boasts that he added the kingdom of Kish to his 
dominions : " Eannatum, patesi of Uagash, by the 
goddess Xinni who loves him, along with the patesiate 
of Lagash was presented with the kingdom of Kish." 
It would seem that in this passage Eannatum lays 
claim, not only to have defeated Kish, but also to 
exercising suzeranity over the northern kingdom. 

With Eannatum's victory over Kish we must 
probably connect the success which he achieved over 
another northern city, Opis. For towards the end of 
the text upon the foundation-stone referred to above, 
these achievements appear to be described as a single 
event, or, at least, as two events of which the second 
closely follows and supplements the first. In the course 
of the formulae celebrating the principal conquests of 
his reign, Eannatum exclaims : '' By Eannatum was 
Elam broken in the head, Elam was dri\en back to 

» See Obv., Col. VI., 11. 2.5 fF., Col. VU.. 11. 1 If. 

2 Foundation-stone A, Col. V.^ 1. 23— Col. VI.j 1. 5 ; 

" Dec," p. xliii. 


his own land ; Kish Wcas broken in the head, and the 
king of Opis was driven back to his own land." ^ 
When referring to the victory over Opis in an earlier 
passage of the same inscription, Eannatum names the 
king who attacked him, and, although he does not give 
many details of the war. it may be inferred that Opis 
was defeated only after a severe struggle. " When the 
king of Opis rose up," the text runs, " Eannatum, 
whose name was spoken by Ningirsu, pursued Zuzu, 
king of Opis, from the Antasurra of Ningirsu up to 
the city of Opis, and there he smote him and destroyed 
him."^ We have already seen reasons for believing 
that the king of Kish took an active part in Umma's 
war with Lagash, and shared her defeat ; and we may 
conjectiu'e that it was to help and avenge his ally that 
Zuzu, king of Opis, marched south and attacked 
Eannatum. That he met with some success at first 
is perhaps indicated by the point from which Eannatum 
records that he drove him back to his own land. For 
the Antasurra was a shrine or temple dedicated to 
Ningirsu, and stood within the territory of Lagash, 
though possibly upon or near the frontier. Here 
Eannatum met the invaders in force, and not only 
dislodged them, but followed up his victory by pur- 
suing them back to their own city, where he claims 
that he administered a still more crushing defeat. It 
is possible that the conquest of Ma'er, or Mari, took 
place at this time, and in connection with the war 
with Opis and Kish, for in one passage Eannatum 
refers to the defeat of these three states at the 
Antasurra of Ningirsu. Ma'er may well have been 
allied with Kish and Opis, and may have contributed 
a contingent to the army led by Zuzu in his attack 
on Lagash. 

It is interesting to note that Kish and the king of 
Kish represented the most dreaded enemies of I^agash, 
at least during a portion of the reign of Eannatum. 
For on a mortar of black basalt which is preserved in 
the British Museum,^ Eannatum, after recording that 
he has dedicated it to Nina, " the Lady of the Holy 

1 See Col, VI., II. G ff. ^ gee Col. IV., 11. 25 ff. 

^ See the opposite plate. 



Brit. Mtts.. Xo. i^Zyi ; photo l<y Afi'ssrs. .I/n//.fc//<S-' Co. 


JNIoiintain," prays that no man may damage it or carry 
it away ; and he then adds the petition, " May the 
King of Kish not seize it ! " This ejacnlation is 
eloquent of the dread which the northern kingdom 
inspired in the cities of the south, and we may see 
in it evidence of many a raid din-ing wliich the tem])les 
of Lagash had been despoiled of their treasures. We 
may well ascribe the dedication of the altar and 
the cutting of the inscription to the early part of 
Eannatum's reign ; at any rate, to a period before the 
powder of Kish was broken in the south ; and, if we are 
right in this supposition, the mortar may perliaps serve 
to date another group of Eannatum's campaigns. For 
in a passage on the second side of this monument it 
appears to be recorded that he had conquered the cities 
of Erech and Ur. The passage follows the invocations 
set forth by Eannatum upon the other side, in the 
course of which he prays that no one sliall remove 
the mortar, or cast it into the fire, or damage it in 
any way ; and it might be argued that tlie lines were 
an addition m:ide to the original text of dedication 
at a considerably later period. In that case the 
passage would afford no proof that the conquest of 
Ur and Erech preceded that of Kish. But both sides 
of the monument have tlie appearance of having been 
engraved by the same hand, and we are probably 
justified in assuming that the whole of the inscription 
was placed upon the vessel at the time it was made. 
We may thus provisionally place the conquest of Ur 
and Erech before that of Kish. Further, in his 
foundation-inscriptions, Eannatum groups his conquest 
of Ur and Erech with that of Ki-babl)ar, " the place 
of the Sun-god," a term which may with considerable 
probability be identified with Earsa, tlie centre of the 
cult of the Sun-god in Southern l^abylonia. It would 
tlius appear that Eannatum conquered these cities, all 
situated in the extreme south of 15a])ylonia at about 
the same period, and probably in the early part of his 

An indication that we are right in placing the 
southern conquests of Eannatum before the war with 
Umma may, perhaps, be seen in the invocations to 


deities engraved upon the Stele of the Vultures with 
vvliich Eannatum sought to protect his treaty. In the 
course of the invocations Eannatum states that he has 
made offerings to the goddess Ninkharsag in the city 
of Kesh, to Enzu, the Moon-god, in Ur, and to Babbar, 
the Sun-god, in Earsa. These passages we may assume 
refer to offerings made by Eannatum in his character of 
suzerain, and, if this view is correct, we must conclude 
that tlie conquest of these cities had already taken 
place. The invocation to Enki perhaps presupposes 
that Eridu also was in the hands of Eannatum at this 
time, a corollary that woidd almost necessarily follow, 
if the three neiglibouring cities of Ur, Erech, and Larsa 
had fallen before his arms. Accordingly, the list of 
gods by whom Eannatum and the men of Umma 
swore to preserve the treaty becomes peculiarly signifi- 
cant. They were selected on political as much as 
on purely religious grounds, and in their combined 
jurisdiction represented the extent of Eannatum's 
dominion in Sumer at the time. That a ruler should 
be in a position to exact an oath by such powerful 
city-gods was obviously calculated to inspire respect 
for his own authority, while the names of the gods 
themselves formed a sufficient guarantee that divine 
punishment would surely follow any violation of the 
treaty. The early successes gained by Eannatum, by 
which he was enabled to exercise suzerainty over the 
principal cities of Southern Babylonia, may well have 
iDeen the cause of his arousing the active hostility of Kish 
and Opis. When he had emerged victorious from his 
subsequent struggle with the northern cities, we may 
assume that he claimed the title of king, which he 
employs in place of his more usual title of patesi in 
certain passages in the text of his treaty with Umma. 

The other conquests recorded in the inscriptions 
of Eannatum fall into two groups. In all the lists 
of his victories that have come down to us— on the 
Stele of the Vultures, the foundation-stones, and the 
brick-inscriptions— the defeat of VA-dui is given the first 
place. This is jn-obably not to be taken as implying 
that it was the first in order of time. It is true that 
the order in which the concjuercd districts and cities 


are arranged is generally tlie same in the different 
lists, but this is not invariably the case. Apart from 
differences caused by the omission or insertion of names, 
the order is sometimes altered ; thus the conquest of 
Arua is recorded before that of Ur on the Stele of 
the Vultures, whereas on the foundation-stones this 
arrangement is reversed. It would, therefore, be rash 
to assume that they were enumerated in the order 
of their occurrence ; it is more probable that the 
conquered states and districts are grouped on a rough 
geographical basis, and that tliese groups are arranged 
according to the importance attaching to them. That 
Elam should always be mentioned first in the lists is 
probably due to the fact that she was the hereditary 
enemy of the cities of Sumer and Akkad, whose rulers 
could never be sure of immunity from her attacks. 
The agricultural wealth of Babylonia offered a tempt- 
ing prey to tiie hardy tribes who dwelt among the 
hills upon the western border of Elam, and the dread 
of the raider and mountaineer, experienced by the 
dweller in the plain, is expressed by Eannatum in 
his description of Elam as " the mountain that strikes 

That in their conflict with Eannatum the Elamites 
were, as usual, the aggressors, is clear from the words 
of the record upon his longer foundation-inscription — 
" by Eannatum was Elam broken in the head, Elam was 
driven back to his own land.'"^ In other passages 
referring to the discomfiture of the Klamites, Eanna- 
tum adds the formula that " he heaped up burial- 
mounds," a phrase which would seem to imply that 
the enemy were only defeated with considerable loss.^ 
It is not unlikely that we may fix the field of battle, 
upon which the forces of Elam were defeated, on the 
banks of the Asukhur Canal, which had been cut two 

• Foumlation-stone A, Col. III., 1. 13. 

2 Col. VI., 11. G If. 

3 The plirase is not to be taken to mean that Eannatum huried the bodies f)f 
the slain Elamites, though it may be a conventional formula employed to 
describe any important battle. It may be noted that Entemena definitely states 
that he left the bones of his enemies to bleach in the open plain, and this was 
probably the practice of the period. Each side would bury its own dead to 
ensure their entrance into the Underworld. 


generations before by Ur-Nina, Eannatum's grand- 
father ; at least, the canal gives its name to a battle- 
field which is mentioned immediately before the name 
of Elam in one of the lists of conquests. It would 
thus seem that the Elamites were engaged in raiding 
the territory of Lagash wlien Eannatum fell upon them 
with his army and drove them northwards and across 
the Tigris. 

Closely associated with Eannatum's success against 
the Elamites were his conquest of Shakh, of a city 
the reading of the name for which is unknown, and pro- 
bably also of a land or district which bore the name of 
Sunanam. The conquest of this last place is only 
mentioned in a broken passage upon the Stele of the 
\"ultures,' between the names of Elam and Sliakh, and 
that of the unknown city, so that little can be inferred 
with regard to it. Shakh, on the other hand, whenever 
it is referred to in the inscriptions of Eannatum, follows 
immediately after the name of Elam, and it was not 
improbably a district on the Elamite frontier which 
Eannatum ravaged during his pursuit of the invaders. 
The city with the unknown name "^ was evidently a 
place of some importance, for not only was it governed 
by a patesi, but when its conquest is mentioned in the 
lists details are usually gi\'en. The interpretation of a 
phrase recording its patesi's action with regard to the 
em})lem of the city is not quite certain, but it would 
appear that on the approach of Eannatum he planted 
it before the citj^-gate. The context would seem to 
imply that this was intended as an act of defiance, not 
of submission, for Eannatum states that he conquered 
the city and heaped up burial-mounds. The site of 
the city, like its name, is unknown, but since the 
records referring to it always follow those concerning 
Elam, we may provisionally regard it as having lain in 
the direction of the Elamite frontier. 

The remaining group of Eannatum's conquests com- 
prise the victories he achieved over Az, Mishime, and 
Arua. The first of these places was a city ruled by 

> Rev., Col. VI., 1. 10— Col. VI F., 1. 3. 

2 The name is expressed by the conflate sign, formed of the signs uru and 
A, the phonetic reading of which is unknown. 


a patesi, whom Eannatum slew when he captured and 
destroyed it. It was formerly regarded as situated in 
the neighbourhood of the Persian Gulf, but the grounds 
on which this view was held have proved inadequate.^ 
Moreover, Eannatum's references to Mishime and Arua 
do not assist us much in determining their positions, 
for he merely states that he destroyed and anniliilated 
them. In a passage upon the Stele of the Vultures, 
however, a reference to the land of Sumer follows 
closely upon a record of the conquest of Arua,^ which 
perhaps is an indication that all three places should be 
sought in Southern Babylonia. We are thus without 
data for settling definitely the region in which this 
group of cities lay, and we are equally witliout infor- 
mation as to the period of his reign in which Eannatum 
captured or destroyed them. The fact that they are 
mentioned last in the lists is no proof that they were 
among his most recent conquests ; it may merely be 
due to their relatively small importance. In support of 
this suggestion we may note that in the longest of his 
foundation-inscriptions Eannatum refers to them once 
only, while his successes against Elam and the northern 
cities are celebrated in two or three separate passages. 

From the preceding discussion of the campaigns 
of Eannatum it will have been seen that during his 
reign a considerable expansion took place in the power 
and influence of I^agash. From being a city-state with 
her influence restricted to her own territory, she became 
head of a confederation of the great Sumerian cities, 
she successfully disputed with the northern cities the 
hegemony in Babylonia, and she put a check upon the 
encroachments of Elam, the hereditary foe of Sumer 
and Akkad alike. According to the view of Eanna- 
tum's conquests which has been put forward, the first 
expansion of the city's influence took place southwards. 

^ Tlie name of the place was formerly read in a short inscription engraved 
upon a mace-head of Gudea^ and it was supposed to be described in tliat 
passage as lying near the Persian Gulf; cf. Ileuzey, "Rev. Arch.," vol. xvii. 
(1891), p. 153; Radau, "Early Bab. Hist.," pp. 81, 191. Rut tlie syllable 
az occurs in that text without the determinative for "place," and it is rather 
to be interpreted as part of the name of tlie mountain from which Gudea 
obtained the breccia for his mace-head ; and the mountain itself is described 
as situated on " the Upper Sea," i.e. the Mediterranean, see below, p. 270 f. 

8 See "Rev.," Col. VIJI. 


The cities of Ur, Erech, Larsa, Kesh, and probably 
Eridu, hud already become her vassal states, before 
Kish and Opis attempted to curtail her growing power ; 
and in the war which followed it is probable that we 
may see a struggle between the combined forces of 
Sumer on the one hand, and those of Akkad on the 
other. One of the most important episodes in this 
conflict was the war with Umma, since the raid by the 
men of that city into the territory of I^agash furnished 
the occasion for the outbreak of hostilities. The issue 
of the conflict placed I^agash in the position of the 
leading city in Babylonia. The fact that from this 
time forward Eannatum did not permanently adopt 
the title of "king" in his inscriptions, may perhaps 
be traced to his preference for the religious title of 
"patesi," which emphasized his dependence upon his 
own city-god Ningirsu. 

The military character of Eannatum is reflected in 
his inscriptions, which in this respect form a strikuig 
contrast to those of his grandfather, Ur-Nina. A\^hile 
the earlier king's records are confined entirely to lists 
of temples and other buildings, which he erected or 
restored in Lagash and its neighbourhood, the texts 
of Eannatum are devoted almost exclusively to his 
wars. From a few scattered passages, however, we 
gather that he did not entirely neglect the task of 
adding to and beautifying the temples in his capital. 
Thus he built a temple for the goddess Gatumdug, 
and added to other buildings which were already 
standing in Ur-Nina's time. But his energies in this 
direction were mainly devoted to repairing the fortifi- 
cations of Lagash, and to putting the city in a complete 
state of defence. Thus he boasts that he built the wall 
of Lagash and made it strong. Since Ur-Nina's time, 
when the city-wall had been thoroughly repaired, it 
is probable that the defences of the city had been 
weakened, for Eannatum also records that he restored 
Girsu, one of the quarters of the city, which we may 
suppose had suflered on the same occasion, and had 
been allowed to remain since then in a partly ruined 
condition. In honour of the goddess Nina he also 
records that he rebuilt, or perhaps largely increased, the 


quarter of the city wliich was named after her, and 
he constructed a wall lor the special protection of 
Uru-azagga, another quarter of Lagash. In fact, the 
political expansion, which took place at this period 
in the power of liagash, was accompanied by an 
equally striking increase in the size and defences of 
the city itself. 

During the reign of Eannatum it is clear that the 
people of Lagash enjoyed a considerable measure of 
prosperity, for, although they were obliged to furnish 
men for tlieir patesi's army, the state acquired consider- 
able wealth from the sack of conquered cities, and from 
the tribute of grain and other supplies which was levied 
upon them as a mark of their permanent subjection. 
]\Ioreover, the campaigns could not have been of very 
long duration, and, after the return of the army on the 
completion of a war, it is probable that the greater part 
of it would be disbanded, and the men would go back 
to their ordinary occupations. Thus the successful 
prosecution of his foreign policy by Eannatum did 
not result in any impoverishment of the material 
resources of his people, and the fertile plains around 
the city were not left imtilled for lack of labour. 
Indeed, it would appear that in the latter part of his 
reign he largely increased the area of land under 
cultivation. For in his longer foundation-inscriptions, 
after recording his principal conquests, he states : ''In 
that day Eannatum did (as follows). Eannatum, . . . 
when his might had borne fruit, dug a new canal for 
Ningirsu, and he named it Lummadimdug." 15y the 
expression " when his might had borne fruit," it is 
clear that Eannatum refers to the latter part of his 
reign, when he was no longer obliged to place his 
army incessantly in the field, and he and his people 
were enabled to devote themselves to the peaceful 
task of developing the material resources of their own 
district in Sumer. 

Another canal, which we know was cut by Eanna- 
tum, was that separating the plain of Gu-edin from 
the territory of Umma, but this was undertaken, not 
for purposes of irrigation, but rather as a frontier- 
ditch to mark the limits of the territory of Lagash in 


that direction. There is little doubt, however, that at 
least a part of its stream was used for supplying water 
to those portions of Gu-edin which lay along its banks. 
Like the canal Lummadimdug, this frontier-ditch was 
also dedicated to Ningirsu, and in the inscription upon 
a small column which records this fact, the name of 
the canal is given as Lummagirnuntashagazaggipadda. 
But this exceedingly long title was only employed upon 
state occasions, such as the ceremony of dedication ; in 
common parlance the name was abbreviated to Lumma- 
girnunta, as we learn from the reference to it upon 
Entcmena's Cone. It is of interest to note that in 
the title of the stone of delimitation, which occurs 
upon the Stele of the Vultures, reference is made to 
a canal named Ug-edin, the title of the stone being 
given as " O Ningirsu, lord of the crown . . . , give 
life unto the canal Ug-edin I " In the following lines 
the monument itself is described as " the Stele of 
Gu-edin, the territory beloved of Ningirsu, which I, 
Eannatum, have restored to Ningirsu " ; so that it is 
clear that the canal, whose name is incorporated in 
that of the stele, must have had some connection with 
the frontier-ditch. Perhaps the canal Ug-edin is to be 
identified with Lummagirnunta, unless one of the two 
was a subsidiary canal. 

For the supply of his principal irrigation-canal with 
water after the period of the spring-floods, Eannatum 
did not depend solely upon such water as might find 
its way in from the river, before the surface of the 
latter sank below the level of the canal-bed ; nor did 
he confine himself to the laborious method of raising 
it from the river to his canal by means of irrigation- 
macliines. Both these methods of obtaining water he 
doubtless employed, but he supplemented them by the 
construction of a reservoir, which should retain at least 
a portion of the surplus water during the early spring, 
and store it up for gradual use in the fields after the 
water-level in the river and canals had fallen. In the 
passage in his foundation-inscription, which records this 
fact, he says : " For Ningirsu he founded the canal 
I^ummadimdug and dedicated it to him ; Eannatum, 
endowed with strength by Ningirsu, constructed the 



ANP rc)xou?:sTS. axd commemokatixc tiik sinking; or wfi,i> in 

/>';■//. Mils.. X<i. Z-c^-- '.photo, /'f .}/is.-/s. .1/n/isi:'/ Cr C<>. 


reservoir of Liimmadimdug, with a capacity of three 
thousand six hundred gur of water." ^ It is true 
that his reservoir was not of very imposing dimensions, 
but its construction proves that Eannatum or liis 
engineers had studied the problem of irrigation in a 
scientific spirit, and had ah'cady evolved the method of 
obtaining a constant water-supply wliich is still regarded 
as giving the best results. 

Smaller canals were possibly dug during Eannatum's 
reign for supplying water to those quarters of I ^agash 
which he improved or added to ; and we also know 
that, where canalization was impracticable, he obtained 
water by sinking wells. Within the enclosure of 
Ningirsu's temple, for instance, he constructed a well 
for supplying the temple with water, and some of the 
bricks have been recovered which lined the well on 
the inside.^ On these he inscribed his name beside 
those of the gods by whom he had been ftivoured ; and, 
after giving a list of his more important conquests, he 
recorded that he had built the well in the spacious 
forecourt of the temple, and had named it Sigbirra, 
and had dedicated it to Ningirsu. From the reference 
to his conquests in the inscription upon the bricks, it 
is clear that the sinking of the well, like the cutting 
of the irrigation-canal Lummadimdug, took place in 
the later years of Eannatinn's reign. 

The phrase with which the well-inscription of 
Eannatum ends may be taken as indicating the measure 
of prosperity to wliich the state of Lagash attained 
under his rule. " In those days," it says, " did Ningirsu 
love Eannatum." But Eannatum's claim to remem- 
brance rests, as we have seen, in a greater degree upon 
his military successes, by means of which he was enabled 
to extend the authority of Lagash over the whole of 
Sumer and a great part of Akkad. He proved himself 
strong enough at the same time to defend his empire 
from the attack of external foes, and it is probable 
that, after his signal defeat of the Elamites, he was not 
troubled by further raids from that quarter. Three 

' Foun<lation-stone A, Col. \U., 11. 3 ff. 

' For one of the inscribed bricks from the well^ see the plate opposite 
p. 164. 


times in the course of his inscriptions he states that 
" by Eannatum, whose name was uttered by Ningirsu, 
were the countries broken in the head," and it would 
appear that his boast was justified. The metaphor 
he here employs is taken from the heavy battle-mace, 
which formed an effective weapon in the warfare of 
the period. It may be seen in use in the scene sculp- 
tured upon the principal monument of Eannatum's 
reign, w^here Ningirsu himself is portrayed as breaking 
the heads of his foes. This representation of the city- 
god of Lagash, one of the finest examples of early 
Sumerian sculpture, in itself admirably symbolizes the 
ambition and achievements of the ruler in whose 
reign and by whose order it was made. 



EANNATUM was the most famous and powerful 
member of Ur-Nina's dynasty, and it is probable 
that his reign marks the zenith of the power of 
Lagash as a city-state. We do not know the cause 
which led to his being succeeded upon the throne by his 
brother Enannatum I., instead of by a son of his own. 
That tlie break in the succession was due to no j^alace- 
revolution is certain from a reference Enannatum makes 
to his brother in an inscription found by Koldewey at 
El-Hibba,^ where, after naming Akurgal as his father, he 
describes himself as " the beloved brother of Eannatum, 
patesi of Lagash." It is possible that Eannatum had 
no male issue, or, since his reign appears to have been 
long, he may have survived his sons. We may indeed 
conjecture that his victories were not won without 
considerable loss among his younger warriors, and 
many cadets of the royal house, including the king's 
own sons, may have given their lives in the service 
of their city and its god. Such may well have been the 
cause of the succession passing from the direct line 
of descent to a younger branch of the family. Tiuit 
Enannatum followed, and did not precede his brother 
upon the throne is proved by the reference to him in 
the El-Hibba text already referred to ; moreover, he 
himself was succeeded by his own immediate descend- 
ants, and a reference to his reign upon the Cone of 
Entemena follows in order of time the same ruler's 
record concerning Eannatum. The few inscriptions 

* See Messerschmidt, " Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmaler," I., p. v., pL 
3, No. 4. 



of his reign, that have been recovered at Tello and 
El-Hibba, are ot a votive ratlier tlian of an historical 
character, and, were it not for the historical summaries 
upon Entemena's Cone and an inscribed plaque of 
Urukagina, we should be without data for tracing 
the history of Sumer at this period. As it is, our 
information is in the main confined to the continued 
rivalry between Lagash and her near neighbour Umma, 
which now led to a renewal of active hostilities. 

We have already seen that, in spite of the increase 
in the power of Lagasli during the reign of Eannatum, 
the city of Umma had not been incorporated in its 
dominion, but had succeeded in maintaining an attitude 
of semi-independence. This is apparent from the terms 
of the treaty, by which the men of Umma undertook 
not to invade the territory of Lagash ; and, although 
they paid a heavy tribute in corn to Eannatum, we 
may assume that they were ready to seize any oppor- 
tunity that might present itself of repudiating the 
suzerainty of Lagash. Such an opportunity they may 
have seen in the death of their conqueror Eannatum, 
for after the accession of his brother we find them 
repeating the same tactics they had employed during 
the preceding reign under the leadership of their patesi, 
Ush. Enakalli, with whom Eannatum had drawn up 
his treaty, had been succeeded on the throne by 
Urlumma. In his cone-inscription Entemena gives 
no indication as to whether there was any interval 
between the rei":n of Enakalli and that of Urlununa. 
But from a small tablet of lapis-lazuli in the "Collection 
de Clercq," we gather tliat the latter was Enakalli's son, 
and, therefore, ])robably his direct successor u])on the 
throne.^ The httle tablet was employed as a foundation- 
memorial, and a short inscription upon it records the 
building of a temple to tlie god Enkigal by Urlumma, 
who describes himself as the son of Enakalli. Each 
ruler bears the title of "king" in the inscription, and, 
although the reading of the sign following the title is 
uncertain, there is little doubt that we should identify 

1 See ''Collection de Clercq, Cataloffue," Tome II., pi. x., No. fi, p. 92 f ; 
Thurcau-Danpiii, "Rev. d'Assyr.," vol. iv., p. 40. The name should possibly 
be read Ur-Khumma (of. " Konigsiuschriftcn," p. 150, n. h.). 


the Urlumma and Enakalli of the tablet with the two 
patesis of Umma who are known to have borne these 

Urhnnma did not maintain his father's policy, 
but, following Ush's example, marshalled his army 
and made a sudden descent upon the territory of 
Lagash. His raid appears to have been attended 
with even greater violence than that of his predecessor. 
Ush had contented himself with merely removing the 
stele of delimitation set up by Mesilim, but Urlumma 
broke that of Eannatum in pieces by casting it into the 
fire, and we may assume that he treated IVIesilim's 
stele in the same way.^ The shrines, or chapels, which 
Eannatum had built upon the frontier and had dedi- 
cated to the gods w^hom he had invoked to guard the 
treaty, were now levelled to the ground. By such acts 
Urlumma sought to blot out all trace of the humiliating 
conditions imposed in earlier years upon his city, and, 
crossing the frontier-ditch of Ningirsu, he raided and 
plundered the rich plains which it had always been the 
ambition of Umma to possess. 

It is probable that Urlumma's object in breaking 
the treaty was not merely to collect spoil from the 
fields and villages he overran, but to gain complete 
possession of the coveted plain. At least, both 
Entemena and Urukagina record that the subsequent 
battle between the forces of Umma and I^agash took 
place w^ithin the hitter's territory, wliich would seem 
to imply that Urlumma and his army did not retreat 
with their plunder to their own city, but attempted to 
retain possession of the land itself. Enannatum met 
the men of Umma in Ugigga, a district within the 
temple-lands of Ningirsu, where a battle was fought, 
which, in Urukagina's brief account, is recorded to 
have resulted in Umma's defeat. Entemena, on the 
other hand, does not say whether Lagash was victorious, 
and his silence is possibly significant, for, had his father 
achieved a decided victory, he would doubtless have 

* In a very fragmentary passage of the clay-inscription of Enannatum from 
El-Hibba, Langdon would see a reference to the removal of Mesilim's stele 
during this revolt; see "Zeits. der Deutschen Morgeuland. Gesellschaft," 
Bd. LXII. (1908), p. 399 f. 


recorded it. Moreover, Urlumma continued to give 
trouble, and it was only in the reign of Entemena 
himself that he was finally defeated and slain. We 
may, therefore, conclude that Enannatum did no more 
than check Urlumma's encroachments, and it is not 
improbable that the latter retained for the time a 
considerable portion of the territory which Lagash had 
enjoyed for several generations. 

Few other f^icts are known of the reign of 
Enannatum I. ^Ve gather that he sent men to the 
mountains, probably of Elam, and caused them to 
fell cedars there and bring the trunks to Lagash ; and 
from the cedar- wood thus obtained he constructed the 
roof of a temple, which appears to have been dedicated 
to Ningirsu. The temple we may probably identify 
with Ningirsu's famous temple E-ninnu, whence we 
have recovered a mortar, which Enannatum prepared 
and presented that it might be used for pounding 
onions in connection with the temple-ritual. Another 
object dedicated to Ningirsu, which dates from this 
period, is preserved in the British Museum, and 
furnishes us with the name of a minister in the service 
of Enannatum. This is a limestone mace-head,^ carved 
with the emblem of Lagash, and bearing an inscription 
from which we learn that it was deposited in the 
temple E-ninnu by Barkiba,^ the minister, to ensure 
the preservation of the life of Enannatum, " his king.' 
It would appear from this record that, although 
Enannatum himself adopted the title of " patesi," 
which he ascribes also to his father Akurgal, it was 
permissible for his subordinates to refer to him under 
the title of " king." That " patesi " was, however, 
his usual designation may be inferred not only from 
his own inscriptions, but from the occurrence of the 
title after his name upon a deed of sale drawn up on 
a tablet of black stone,^ which probably dates from 
his reign. From this document, as well as from a 
text inscribed uj)on clay cones found by Koldewey at 

1 See "Cuneifonii Texts," I't. ^'., pi. 1, " Konifrsinschriften," p. W f, ; 
for a drawing of the ohject, see l^tidge, " History of Ktrypt," vol. i., p. 07. 

2 The reading of the last syllahlc of the name i8 not certain. 

3 Cf " Dec. en Chaldee," p. xlix. 


El-Hibba/ we also learn that Enannatum had a son 
named Lummadur,^ in addition to Entenicna. It 
should be noted that neither on the clay cones nor 
on the tablet of black stone is the name of Enannatum's 
father recorded, so that tlie suggestion has been made 
that they should be referred to Enannatum II., rather 
than to Enannatum I. 15ut the adornment of the 
temple E-anna, recorded on the cones, is referred to 
in the clay-inscription of Enannatum I., which, like 
the cones, was found at El-Hibba.^ It is reasonable 
therefore to assign the cone-inscription also to Enanna- 
tum I., and to conclude that Lummadur was his 
son, rather than the son and possible successor of 
Enannatum II. The cone-inscription records the 
installation of I>ummadur by his lather as priest in 
E-anna, when that temple had been adorned and 
embellished in honour of the goddess Ninni. Since 
Enannatum was succeeded upon the throne of Lagash 
by Entemena, we may assume that Lummadur was 
the latter 's younger brother. 

One of the first duties Entemena was called upon 
to perform, after ascending the throne, was the defence 
of his territory against further encroachments by 
Urlumma. It is evident that this ruler closely watched 
the progress of events in Lagash, and such an occasion 
as the death of the reigning patesi in that city might 
well have appeared to him a suitable time for the 
renewal of hostilities. The death of the great con- 
queror Eannatum had already encouraged him to raid 
and occupy a portion of the territory held up to that 
time by Lagash, and, although Eannatum had succeeded 
in holding him to some extent in cheek, he only awaited 
a favourable opportunity to extend the area of territory 
under his control. Such an opportunity he would 
naturally see in the disappearance of his old rival, for 
there was always the chance that the new ruler would 
prove a still less successful leader than his father, or 
his accession might give rise to dissension among the 
members of the royal house, which would materially 

1 Cf. '' Vorderas. Schriftdenkmaler," I., \>. v., pi. 4, No. 5 a-d. 

2 The name is also read as Khunimatur. 
2 See above, p. 157, n. 1. 



weaken the city's poAver of resistance. His attack 
appears to have been carefully organized, for there is 
evidence that he strengthened his own resources by 
seeking assistance from at least one other neighbouring 
state. His anticipation of securing a decided victory 
by this means was, however, far from being realized. 
Entemena lost no time in summoning his forces, and, 
having led them out into the plain of Lagasli, he met 
the armv of Urlumma at the frontier-ditch of Lumma- 
girnunta, which his uncle Eannatmn had constructed 
for the defence and irrigation of Gu-edin, the fertile 
territory of Ningirsu. Here he inflicted a signal defeat 
upon the men of Umma, who, when routed and put 
to flight, left sixty of their fellows lying dead upon 
the banks of tl\e canal. ^ Urlumma himself fled from 
the battle, and sought safety in his own city. But 
Entemena did not rest content with the defeat he 
had inflicted upon the enemy in the field. He pursued 
the men of Umma into their own territory, and suc- 
ceeded in capturing the city itself before its demoralized 
inhabitants had had time to organize or strengthen its 
defence. Urlumma he captured and slew, and he 
ilms put an end to an ambitious ruler, who for years 
had undoubtedly caused much trouble and annoyance 
to Lagash. Entemena's victory was complete, but 
it was not won without some loss among his own 
forces, for he heaped up burial-mounds in five separate 
places, whicli no doubt covered the bodies of his own 
slain. The bones of the enemy, he records, were left 
to bleach in the open plain. 

Entemena now proceeded to annex Umma, and 
he incorporated it within the state of Lagash and 
reorganized its administration under officers appointed 
by himself. As the new patesi of Umma he did not 
appoint any native of that city, but transferred thither 
an official of his own, who held a post of considerable 

^ So lliureauDanpn, " Konigsinschriften," p. 38 f., Cone, Col. III., 
11. 10 If. Cenouillac would interpret the passage as meaning that the men of 
Umma abandoned in their flight sixty of their chariots of war (cf. ''Tabl. 
sum. arcli.," p. xii.). 'J'liese, of course, were drawn by asses, tlie earliest 
mention of a horse in Babylonia occurring on a tablet of tlie period of Ham- 
murabi or Samsu-iluna (cf Tliignad, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," lUOT, col. 638 f.) ; 
the regular use of tlie borso was introduced by the Kassites. 

.MARni.K C. \TI -vQCKKT |;kAR1N(J AX I N.>CklP IK >\ (}]■■ ENTK.M KNA, 
"'//. .Uifs., Xo. gog32 ; /i/iofa. /y Mlssis. Manscil ^~ Co. 


importance in another town under the suzerainty of 
Lagash. The name of the official was Ih, and at the 
time of the annexation of Umma he was acting as 
sangu, or priest, of the town, the name of which has 
been provisionally read as Ninab or Xinni-esh. Though 
the reading of the name of the place is still uncertain, 
it would appear to have been situated in Southern 
Babylonia, and to have been a place of some importance. 
A small tablet in the Louvre mentions together certain 
men of Erech, of Adab and of Ninni-esh,^ and, when 
Lugal-zaggisi enumerates the benefits he had conferred 
on the cities of Southern Babylonia over which he 
ruled, he mentions Umma and Ninni-esh together, 
after referring to Erech, Ur, and Larsa.^ We may, 
therefore, conclude with some probability that the city 
in which Hi was at this time acting as priest was 
situated not far from Umma. It was under the control 
of Lagash, and doubtless formed part of the empire 
which Eannatum had bequeathed to his successors 
upon the throne. Hi is described as the priest, not 
the patesi, of the city, and it is possible that his office 
included the control of its secular administration. But 
in view of the importance of the place, it is unhkely 
that it was without a patesi. 

The installation of Hi in the patesiate of Umma 
was accompanied by some degree of ceremonial. It 
would appear that his appointment did not take place 
immediately after the capture of the town, but that 
a short interval elapsed between the close of the war 
and the inauguration of the new government. INIean- 
while, Entemena himself had returned to Lagash, and 
it was to that city that he summoned Hi into his 
presence. He then set out with Hi from Girsu, and, 
when Umma was reached, he formally installed him 
at the head of the government, and conferred on him 
the title of patesi. At the same time he dictated his 
own terms to the peoj^le of Umma, and commissioned 
lU to see that they were duly carried out. In the 

1 See Thureau-Dangin, ^'Rev. d'Assyr./' p. 40, n. 4 ; " Recueil de tabl. 
chald.," p. 56, No. 120. 

2 Sec Hilprecht, "Old Bab. Inscr./' Pt. II., No. 87, pi. 40, Col. II., 
U. 26 ff. 


first place he restored to Lagash the territory to which 
she had always laid claim, and the ancient frontier- 
ditches, which had heen filled up or had fallen in, he 
caused to be repaired. In addition to reasserting the 
traditional rights of Lagash, he annexed new land in 
the district of Karkar, since its inhabitants had taken 
part in the recent rebellion, and had probably furnished 
an important contingent for the army of Urlumma. 
He gave directions to Hi to extend the two principal 
frontier-ditches, dedicated to Ningirsu and Nina 
respectively, within the territory of Karkar ; and, with 
the large supply of forced labour which he exacted 
from his newly annexed subjects, he strengthened the 
defences of his own territory, and restored and extended 
the system of canals between the Euphrates and the 
Tigris. But Entemena did not content himself with 
exacting land and labour only from the conquered 
city. He imposed a heavy tribute in corn, and it 
was probably one of Hi's most important duties as 
patesi to superintend its collection and ensure its 
punctual transfer into the granaries of Lagash. 

In order to commemorate the conquest and annexa- 
tion of Umma, Entemena caused a record of his victory 
to be drawn up, which he doubtless had engraved upon 
a stone stele similar to those prepared in earlier times 
by Mesilim and Eannatum. This stele, like the earlier 
ones, was probably set up upon the frontier to serve as 
a memorial of his achievements. Fortunately for us, 
he did not confine the records to his own victories, but 
prefaced them with an epitomized account of the rela- 
tions which had existed between Lagash and Umma 
from the time of Mesilim until his own day. Other 
copies of the inscription were probably engraved upon 
stone and set up in the cities of Umma and Lagash, 
and, in order to increase still further the chances in 
favour of the preservation of his record, he had copies 
inscribed upon small cones of clay. These last were of 
the nature of foundation-memorials, and we may con- 
clude that he had tliem buried beneath the buildings 
he erected or repaired upon the frontier-canals, and also 
perhaps in the foundations of temples within the city 
of Lagash itself. Entemena's foresight in multiplying 


the number of his texts, and in buryhifr them in tlie 
structure of his buildings, was in accordance with the 
practice of the period ; and in his case the custom has 
been fully justified. So far as we know, his great stone 
stelic have perished ; but one of the small clay cones * 
has been recovered, and is anions: the most valuable of 
the records we possess of the early history of Sinner. 

It is possible that the concluding paragraphs of tlie 
text were given in a fuller form upon the stone stcL'u 
than we find them upon the cone ; but, so far as the 
historical portion of the record is concerned, we have 
doubtless recovered the greater part, if not the whole, 
of Entemena's record. The stelae may have been 
engraved with elaborate curses, intended to preserve 
the frontier-ditch from violation, and, though tiiese 
have been omitted in the shorter version of the text, 
their place is taken by the brief invocation and prayer 
with which the record concludes. Entemena here 
prays that if ever in time to come the men of Umma 
should break across the boundary-ditch of Ningirsu or 
the boundary-ditch of Xina, in order to lay violent 
hands upon the territory of Lagash, whether they be 
men of the city of Umma itself or people from the 
lands round about, then may Enlil destroy them, and 
may Ningirsu cast over them his net, and set his hand 
and foot upon them. And, should the warriors of his 
own city be called upon to defend it, he prays that 
their hearts may be full of ardour and courage. It was 
not many years before Lagash was in sore need of the 
help which is here invoked for her by Entemena. 

Apart from the cone recording the conquest of 
Umma, the inscriptions of Entemena do not throw 
much light upon the military achievements of his reign. 
Three fragments of a limestone vase have been found 
at Nippur in the strata beneath the temple of Enlil on 
the south-east side of the ziggurat, or temple-tower, 
bearing on their outer surface a votive inscription of 
Entemena.^ From these we gather that the vase was 
dedicated to Enlil as a thank-offering after some 

» "Dec. en Chaid.," p. xlvii. ; Thureau-Dangin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," 
Vol. IV., pp. 37 ff., " Konigsiiischriften," pp. 36 ff. 

2 Cf. Hilprecht, " Old Bab. Inscr.," Pt. II., pi. 48 f., Nos. 115-117. 


victory. The fragmentary character of the inscription 
prevents us from identifying the enemy who was suh- 
ducd on tliis occasion ; but we sliall probably be right 
in taking the passage as referring, not to the conquest 
of Umma, but to the subjugation of some other district. 
In fact, we may regard the vase as evidence that 
Entemena attempted to retain his hold upon the empire 
which Eannatum had founded, and did not shrink from 
the necessity of undertaking military expeditions to 
attain this object. In further support of this view we 
may perhaps cite a reference to one of the cities con- 
quered by Eannatum, which occurs upon a votive text 
drawn up in Entemena's reign, though not by the 
patesi himself The text in question is stamped upon 
the perforated relief of Dudu, chief priest of Ningirsu,^ 
which at one time formed the support of a colossal 
ceremonial mace-head dedicated in the temple of Nin- 
girsu at Lagash. 

The material of which the block is composed is dark 
in colour, comparatively light in weight, and liable to 
crack ; it consists of a mixture of clay and bitumen, and 
may have been formed by nature or produced artificially.^ 
^^^hile this substance was still in a pliant state the block 
was formed from it, and the designs with the inscription 
were impressed by means of a stamp. According to 
the inscription, this bituminous substance was brought 
by Dudu to Lagash from one of the cities which had 
been conquered by Eannatum and incorporated within 
his empire. The fact that Dudu should have caused 
the substance to be procured from tlie city in question 
suggests that friendly relations existed between it and 
Lagash at the time ; it is quite possible that it had not, 
meanwhile, secured its independence, but still continued 
to acknowledge the suzerainty of the latter city. The 
only otlicr references to a foreign city in the texts of 
Entemena occur upon his two ])rincipal building in- 
scriptions,^ which include among the list of his buildings 

1 See the plate opposite p. 110. 

2 Cf. Ileiizey, "Dec. en (li.ild.," p. 204. 

* The two principal biiihlinj? texts are engraved upon an alabaster 
foundation-tablet ("Dec. en Chald.," p. xlvi.), and upon a fine gate-socket of 
Entemena preserved in the Britisli Museum (" Cun, Txts.," Pt. X., pi. 1). 



the erection of a great laver for the god Knki, described 
as " King of Eridii." We may perhaps see in this record 
a further indication that at least the soutliern portion 
of Eannatuni's empire still remained in his nephew's 

The high-priest, Dudu, whose portrait is included 
in the designs upon the plaque already referred to. 

Fig. 49. 

Pig. 50 

Fig. 51. 

Details from the engravings upon Entemena's silver vase. The upper group 
represents the emblem of Lagash ; in the lower groups ibexes and stags are 
substituted for the lions. 

[D6c., pi. 43 bis; Cat. No. 218.] 

appears to have been an important personage during 
the reign of Entemena, and two inscriptions that lia\e 
been recovered are dated by reference to his period of 
office. One of these occurs upon the famous siher 
vase of Entemena, the finest example of Sumerian 
metal work that has yet been recoxered. The vase, 
engraved in outline with variant forms of the emblem 
of Lagash,^ bears an inscription around the neck, stating 
that Entemena, patesi of Lagash, " the great patesi of 

All were inscribed towards the end of Eutemena's reign, tlie gate-socket at 
a rather earlier date than tlie tablets. 

* See the plate opposite p. 168, and see abovCj p. 78. 


Ningirsu," had fashioned it of pure silver and had dedi- 
cated it to Ningirsu in E-ninnu to ensure the preserva- 
tion of his Hfe. It Avas deposited as a votive object in 
Ningirsu's temple, and a note is added to the dedication 
to the effect that " at this time Dudu was priest of 
Ningirsu." A siinihir reference to Dudu's priesthood 
occurs upon a foundation-inscription of Entemena 
recording the construction of a reservoir for tlie supply 
of the Lummadimdug Canal, its capacity being little 
more than half tliat of the earlier reservoir constructed 
by Eannatum. Since the canal was dedicated to Nin- 
girsu, the reference to Dudu was also here appropriate. 
But such a method of indicating the date of any object 
or construction, even though closely connected with 
the worship or property of the city-god, was somewhat 
unusual, and its occurrence in these texts may perhaps 
be taken as an indication of the powerful position which 
Dudu enjoyed/ Indeed, Enlitarzi, another priest of 
Ningirsu during Entemena's reign, subsequently secured 
the throne of Lagash. Entemena's building-inscrip- 
tions afford further evidence of his devotion to Ningirsu, 
w^hose temple and storehouses he rebuilt and added to. 
Next in order of importance were his constructions in 
honour of the goddess Nina, while he also erected or 
repaired temples and other buildings dedicated to Lugal- 
uru, and the goddesses Ninkharsag, Gatumdug, and 
Ninmakh. Such records suggest that Entemena's 
reign, like that of Eannatum, was a period of some 
prosperity for I^agash, although it is probable that her 
influence was felt within a more restricted area.^ By 
his conquest and annexation of Umma, he more than 
made up for any want of success on the part of his 
father, Enannatum I., and, through this victory alone, 
he may well ha\e freed I^agash from her most per- 
sistent enemy throughout the reign of liis immediate 

With Enannatum II., the son of Entemena, who suc- 
ceeded his father upon the throne, the dynasty founded 

* That in virtue of liis office the priest of Ningirsu at this period occupied 
a position of considerable importince is also clear from the douhle dates, by 
patesiate and priesthood ; see below, p. 171. 

'^ Entemena appears to have reigned at least twenty-nine years ; see 
Allotte de la Fuye, " Hilprecht Anniversary Volume," p. 123. 



I'A'I 1-^1 ' 'I SHIKI'IKI.A. 
In thi- Lou: n Clialii.. pi. 43 (I'ls). 


by Ur-Ninu, so far as we know, came to an end.* The 
reign of Entemcna's son is attested by a single inscrip- 
tion engraved upon a door-socket from the great store- 
house of Ningirsu at Lagash, his restoration of which is 
recorded in the text. There then occurs a gaj) in our 
sequence of royal inscriptions found at Tello, the next 
ruler who has left us any records of his own, being 
Urukagina, the ill-fated reformer and king of Lagash, 
under whom the city was destined to sufier what was 
undoubtedly the greatest reverse she encountered in the 
long course of her history. Although we have no royal 
texts relating to the period between the reigns of Enan- 
natum II. and Urukagina, we are fortunately not 
without means for estimating approximately its length 
and recovering the names of some, if not all, of the 
patesis who occupied the throne of Lagash in the 
interval. Our information is derived from a number of 
clay tablets, the majority of which were found in the 
course of native diggings at Tello after M. de Sarzec's 
death.^ They formed part of the private archive of the 
patesis of Lagash at this time, and are concerned with 
the household expenses of the court and particularly of 
the harim. Frequently these tablets of accounts make 
mention of the reigning patesi or his wife, and from 
them we have recovered the names of three patesis — 
Enetarzi, Enlitarzi, and Lugal-anda^ — who are to be 
set in the interval between Enannatum 11. and Uruka- 
gina. Moreover, it has been pointed out that the 
inscriptions upon most of the tablets end with a peculiar 
form of figure, consisting of one or more diagonal 
strokes cutting a single horizontal one ; and a plausible 
explanation has been given of these figures, to the effect 

' That offerings continued to he made in connection with Ur-Nin;Vs statue 
during Lugal-anda's reign (aa evinced hy tablets of the period, cf. Allotto de 
la Fuye, "Rev. d'Assyr.," VI., p. 107, and Genouillac, "Tabl. sum. arch./' 
p. Ivii.) is no proof of the continuance of his dynasty, though it is evidence of 
the honour in wJiich its founder was still held. Genouillac suggests that 
Enetarzi and Enlitarzi may have been related, and possibly sons of Enan- 
uatum II. {op. cit., p. xii.), but the suggestion is purely conjectural. 

2 See Thurean-Dangin, " Recueil de tablettes chaldeennes," pp. ii f., 9 ff., 
Allotte de ia Fuye, " Documents pre'sargoniques," and Genouillac, " I'ablettes 
sumdriennes archaiqnes." 

3 Tlie full form of the name appears to have been Lugal-andanushuga (see 
Thureau-Dangin, op. cit., p. 17, No. 33, Rev., Col. II., 1. 2, aud " Kouiga- 
inschriften/' p. 224) ; but it was generally abbreviated to Lugal-anda. 


that tliey were intended to indicate the date of the 
tablet, the number of diagonal strokes si lowing at a 
glance the year of the patesi's reign in which the text 
was written, and to which the accounts refer. A con- 
siderable number of such tablets have been examined, 
and by counting the strokes upon them it has been con- 
cluded that Enetarzi reigned for at least four years, 
Enlitarzi for at least five years, and Lugal-anda for at 
least seven years/ 

The relative order of these three patesis may now 
be regarded as definitely fixed, and, though it is possible 
that the names of others are missing which should be 
set within the period, the tablets themselves furnish 
indications that in any case the interval between 
Enannatum II. and Urukagina was not a long one. It 
had for some time been suspected that Enlitarzi and 
Lugal-anda lived at about the same period, for a steward 
named Shakh was employed by the wife of Enlitarzi as 
well as by Barnamtarra, the wife of Lugal-anda.^ This 
inference has now been confirmed by the discovery of a 
document proving that Lugal-anda Avas Enlitarzi's son ; 
for a clay cone has been found, inscribed with a contract 
concerning the sale of a house, the contracting parties 
being the family of Lugal-anda, described as " the son 
of Enlitarzi, the priest," and the family of Barnamtarra, 
Lugal-anda's future wife.^ IMoreover, we have grounds 
for believing that Lugal-anda was not only the last of 
the three patesis whose names have been recovered, but 
was Urukagina's immediate predecessor. An indication 
that this was the case may be seen in the fact that the 
steward Eniggal, who is frequently mentioned in 
tablets of his reign, was also employed by Urukagina 
and his wile Shafrshacf. Confirmation of this view has 
been found in the text upon a tablet, dated in the first 
year of Urukagina's reign as king, in wliicli mention is 

» See Aliotte do la Fuye, "Revue d'Assyr.," \o\. VI., No. 4, p. 107. 
Similar figures have been found upon clay sealings, which were probably 
attached to bundles of such tablets. It is possible tliat Enlitarzi reigned for 
at least seven years and Lugal-anda for at least nine ; see Aliotte de la Fuye, 
"Hilprecht Anniversary Volume," p. 123. 

2 Cf 'ITiurcaii-Dangin, " Uec. de t^ibl. cliald.," p. ii. t. 

3 Cf Genouillac, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," XL, col. 215, n. 6. The wife of 
Enlitarzi was Luguinitur, and in addition to Lugal-anda lie liad a son named 
l^rtar, who was living in Lugal-anda's reign (cf. " Tabl. sum. arch.," p. xii.). 


made of Barnamtarra, Liigal-anda's wife.^ This only 
leaves an interval before the reign of Enlitarzi, in wliieli 
Enetarzi, the remaining patesi, is to be set. 

That this was not a long period is clear from the 
fjict that Enhtarzi himself occupied the throne soon 
after Enannatum II., an inference we may draw from a 
double date upon a sale-contract, dated in the patesiate 
of Entemena, patesi of Lagash, and in the priesthood of 
Enlitarzi, chief priest of Ningirsu.'^ There can be no 
doubt of the identity of Enlitarzi, the priest here re- 
ferred to, with Enlitarzi, the patesi, for the wife of the 
priest, who is mentioned in the contract, bears the same 
name as the wife of the patesi.^ Since, therefore, 
Enlitarzi already occupied the high position of chief 
priest of Ningirsu during the reign of Entemena, it is 
reasonable to conclude that his reign as patesi was not 
separated by any long interval from that of Entemena's 
son and successor. The internal evidence furnished by 
the texts thus supports the conclusion suggested by an 
examination of the tablets themselves, all of which are 
distinguished by a remarkable uniformity of type, con- 
sisting, as they do, of baked clay tablets of a rounded 
form and written in a style which closely resembles that 
of Urukagina's royal inscriptions. The interval between 
the death of Entemena and Urukagina's accession was 
thus a short one, and the fact that during it no less 
than four patesis followed one another in quick succes- 
sion suggests that the period was one of unrest in Lagash. 

Like Enlitarzi, Enetarzi also appears to have been 
chief priest of Ningirsu before he secured the throne; 

* The "great patesi" and Eanianitarra are here mentioned in a list of 
functionaries. With the former Genouillac would identify Lugal-anda, who, 
lie suggests, after being dethroned by Urukagina, was allowed to retain the 
title of patesi with its purely religious functions. In support of this view he 
cites another tablet dated in Urukagina's second year, which enumerates 
presents made by "the patesi" to Amat-Bau, daughter of Urukagina ; it is 
significant that the beasts were furnished by Lugal-anda's steward. Other 
tablets mention offerings made by "the patesi" to Shakh-Bau and Aenragin, 
other children of Urukagina (see Genouillac, "Tabl. sum. arcb.," p. xiv. f.). 
Genouillac also suggests that Enlitarzi may have survived through tlio 
patesiate of his son, Lugal-anda, until the beginning of Urukagina's reign 
{op. cit., p. xiii.). 

2 See Thureau-Dangin, " Rec. de tabl. chald.," No. 26, pp. ii., 9. 

3 Moreover, Enlitarzi is given tlie title of "priest" in the contract 
inscribed on the clay cone referred to on p. 170. 


at least we know that a priest of that name held office 
at about this period. The inscription from which this 
fact may be inferred is an extremely interesting one/ 
for it consists of the earliest example of a letter or 
despatch that has yet been found on any l^abylonian 
site. It was discovered at 'i'ello during the recent 
excavations of Commandant Cros, and, alike in the 
character of its writing and in its general appearance, it 
closely resembles the tablets of accounts from the 
patesis' private archive, to which reference has already 
been made. The despatch was written by a certain 
Lu-enna, chief priest of the goddess Ninmar, and is 
addressed to Enetarzi, chief priest of the god Ningirsu. 
At first sight its contents are scarcely those which we 
should expect to find in a letter addressed by one chief 
priest to another. For the writer informs his corre- 
spondent that a band of Elamites had pillaged the 
territory of Lagash, but that he had fought with the 
enemy, and had succeeded in putting them to flight. 
He then refers to five hundred and forty of them, whom 
he probably captured or slew. The reverse of the 
tablet enumerates various amounts of silver and wool, 
and certain royal garments, which may have formed 
part of the booty taken, or recaptured, from the 
Elamites ; and the text ends with what appears to be a 
reference to the division of this spoil between the 
patesi of Lagash and another high official, and with 
directions that certain offerings should be deducted for 
presentation to the goddess Ninmar, in whose temple 
the writer was chief priest. 

That a chief priest of Ninmar should lead an army 
against the enemies of Lagash and should send a report 
of his success to the chief priest of Ningirsu, in which 
he refers to the share of the spoil to be assigned to 
the patesi, may be regarded as an indication that the 
central government of Lagash was not so stable as it 
once had been under the more powerful members of 
CJr-Nina's dynasty. The reference to Enetarzi suggests 
that the incursion of the Elamites took place during 
the reign of Enannatum II. We may thus conclude 
that tlie last member of Ur-Nina's dynasty did not 

» Cf. 'ITiureau-Dangiii, " Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. VI., pp. 137 ff. 


possess his father's abihty to direct the affiiirs of Lagash 
and allowed the priests of the great temples in tlie city 
to usurp many of the privileges which had hitherto 
been held by the patesi. It is probably to this fact 
that the close of Ur-Xina's dynasty may be traced. 
The subsequent struggle for the patesiate appears to 
have taken place among the more important members 
of the priesthood. Of those who secured the throne, 
Enlitarzi, at any rate, was succeeded by his son, by 
whom, however, he may have been deposed,^ and no 
strong administration appears to have been established, 
until Urukagina, abandoning the traditions of both the 
priesthood and the patesiate, based his government on 
the support he secured from the people themselves. 
Such appears to have been the course of events at this 
time, although the paucity of our historical materials 
renders it impossible to do more than hazard a 

In addition to the tablets of accounts concerning the 
household expenditure of the patesis, and the letter to 
Enetarzi from Lu-enna, the principal relics of this period 
that have come down to us are numbers of clay sealings, 
some of which bear impressions of the seals of the 
patesi Lugal-anda, his wife Barnamtarra, and his steward 
Eniggal. They afford us no new historical information, 
but are extremely \ aluable for the study of the artistic 
achievements and religious beliefs of tlie Sumerians.^ 
From the traces upon the lower sides, it is clear that 
they were employed for sealing reed-baskets or bundles 
tied up in sacking formed of palm-leaves and secured 
with cords. In consequence of the rough character of 
the lumps of clay, no single one presents a perfect 
impression, but, as several examples of each have been 
found, it is possible in some cases to reconstruct the 
complete design and to estimate the size of the original 
seal. In the accompanying blocks reproductions are 

1 The fact that Enlitarzi may have survived during the patesiate of his 
son scarcely justifies the view that the office of patesi was not necessarily held 
for life. 

•'' See Allotte de la Fuye, " Rev. d'Assyr ," Vol. VI., pp. 105 ff. ; " Doc. 
presargon.," pi. v. ff. Similar sealings in the Museum of the Hermitage at 
St. Petersburg have been published by M. Likhatcheff (of. also GeuouilLic, 
"Tabl. sum. arch.," p. ix.). 


given of the designs upon the cylinder-seals of Lugal- 
anda which can be most conipletely restored. The 
principal group of figures in the larger of the two 
consists of two rampant lions in conflict with a human- 
headed bull and a mythical and composite being, half- 

FiG. 52. 


Fig. 53. 

Impression of a seal of Lugal-anda, patesi of Lagash (Shirpuria), engraved with 
the emblem of Lagash, and with figures of animals, heroes, and mythological 
creatures. Below in a reconstruction of the cylinder-seal, indicating its size. 
[See Allotte de la Fuye, Rev. d'Assyr., Vol. VI., No. 4, pi. i.] 

bull and half-man, whose form recalls the description 
of Ea-bani in tlie legend of Gilgjunesli. To the left 
of the inscription is tlie emblem of Lagash, and below 
is a row of smaller figures consisting of two human- 
headed bulls, two heroes and a stag. The figures on 



the smaller cylinder represent the same types, but 
here the emblem of Lagash is reduced to the eagle 
without the lions, which was peculiarly the emblem 
of Nmgirsu. The mythological being who resembles 
Ea-bani is repeated heraldically on each side of the 
text in conflict with a lion. 

The occurrence of this figure and those of the 

Fig. 54. 


Fig. 55. 

Impression of a seal of Lugal-anda, patesi of Lagash (Shirpurla), engraved 
with figures of animals, mythological beings, and a bearded hero. Below is a 
reconstruction of tho cylinder-seal, indicating its size. 

[See Allotte de la Fuye, Ecv. d'Assijr., Vol. VI., No. 4, pi. ii.] 

other heroes upon the seals is important, as it points 
to a knowledge on the part of the earlier Sumerians, 
of the principal legends that were incorporated in the 
great national epic of Babylon.^ The sealings are no 
less important for the study of Sumerian art, and they 
prove that seal-cutting must ha\ e already been practised 
by the Sumerians for a considerable length of time. 

1 Allotte de la Fuye, "Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. VI., p. 110 fL 


While the designs are of a very decorative character, 
it is interesting to note how tlie artist has attempted 
to fill up every portion of his field, an archaic trait 
which is in striking contrast to the Semitic seals of the 
Sargonic period. Another peculiarity which may here 
be referred to is the employment, on the larger seal 
below the inscription, of a sort of arabesque pattern, an 
ingenious and symmetrical combination of straiglit lines 
and curves, the course of which may be followed with- 
out once passing along the same line a second time. It 
has been suggested that this pattern may have formed 
the engra\'er's monogram or signature,^ but it is more 
likely to have been a religious symbol, or may perhaps 
be merely decorative, having been added to fill in a 
blank space remaining in the field of the seal. The 
discovery of these seal-impressions enables us to realize 
that, in spite of the period of political unrest through 
which Lagash was now passing, her art did not suffer, 
but continued to develop along its own lines. In fact, 
her sculptors and engravers were always ready to serve 
the reigning patesi, whoever he might be. 

Although, as we have seen, the exact relation of the 
three patesis, Enetarzi, Enlitarzi, and Lugal-anda, to the 
dynasty of Ur-Nina is still a matter for conjecture, 
there is no doubt that with Urukagina, at any rate, a 
complete break took place, not only in the succession, 
but also in the traditions and principles which had 
guided for so long the ruling family at Lagash. That 
Urukagina did not obtain the throne by right of 
succession is clear from the total absence of any 
genealogies in his inscriptions. He docs not even 
name his father,^ so that we may trace his succession 

' See Allotte de la Fuye, op. cit., p. 118. 

2 The tablets of accounts, so far as they have been examined, furnish no 
information on Urukapfina's antecedents ; but it may be noted that they ^ive 
det'iils with repnrd to liis children, cf. Genouillac, "Orient. Lit-Zeit.," XI., 
col. 21G, n. 2, and "'I'abl. sum. arch.," pp. xv., xxiii. f. On tlie Obelisk of 
Manishtusu, kintj of Kish, mention is made of a certain Urukagina, son of 
Enf^ilsa, jtatesi of Ljigash. Since a tiblet of the period of Urukagina enumerates 
offerings made by Sbagshag, (Jriikagina's wife, on behalf of a certain Engilsa 
and heraelf, Genouillac accepts the identification of the two Urukaginas, 
applying the title of patesi in Manislitusu's texts to Urukagina, not Engilsa 
(cf. "Tabl. sum. arch.," p. xiv.). This synchronism between the rulers of 
Lagash and Kish, if estiblishcd, would be most valuable for the early 
chronology ; but it i.s not certain, and the recurrence of the names may bo 
merely a coincidence (sec further, p. 200 f.). 


to his own initiative. He himself ascribes to Ningirsu 
his elevation to the throne, and the phrase that follows 
suggests that this was not acconi{)lished without a 
struggle. When describing in detail the drastic reforms 
whicli he had carried out in the internal administration 
of the state, he prefaces his account by stating that they 
took place when Ningirsu had given him the kingdom 
of Lagash and had established his might. In view of 
these very reforms, we may regard it as extremely 
probable that he headed a reaction against certain 
abuses which had characterized the recent government 
of the city, and that, in usurping the throne, he owed 
his success to a wide-spread feeling of discontent among 
the great body of the people. 

Further evidence of a complete break in the 
succession may be seen in the change of the patron 
deity, whose protection the reigning house enjoyed. 
Urukagina no longer invoked the god on whom the 
dynasty of Ur-Nina had relied for intercession with 
Ningirsu,^ and in his place addressed himself to 
Ninshakh. The very title which Urukagina himself 
adopted is probably significant of his antagonism to the 
family which for so long had directed the destinies of 
the state. While even the great conqueror Eannatum 
had proudly clung to the title of " patesi," and his suc- 
cessors on the throne had followed his example, in every 
one of his own inscriptions that have been recovered 
Urukagina rejects it in favour of that of " king." 

It would appear that he did not inaugurate this 
change immediately upon his accession, and that for 
at least a year he continued to use the title employed 
by his predecessors. For some of the tablets of accounts 
from the private archive of the patesis, to which refer- 
ence has already been made,'"^ appear to be dated in the 
first year of Urukagina's patesiate ; while the other 
documents of this class, which refer to him, are dated 
from the first to the sixth year of his reign as king. 
So that, if there is no gap in the sequence, we may 
conclude that he discarded the former title after having 

1 The reading of the name of this deity (Dun- . . .) 13 still uncertain ; it 
has been read variously as Dun-sir, ShuVgur, and Dun-gur ; see above, p. 109. 
^ See above, p. 169 f. 



occupied the tlirone for one year. His dropping of this 
time-honoured designation niuy well liave accompanied 
tlie abolition of privileges and abuses with which it had 
become associated in the mind of the people. Indeed, 
the tone of his inscriptions reflects no feeling of venera- 
tion for the title of patesi, nor does he appear anxious 
to commemorate the names of those who had borne it. 
Thus in one of his texts, when he has occasion to give a 
brief historical summary of an earlier struggle between 
Lagash and Umma, he names the ruler of the latter 
city, but he ascribes the former's victory to Ningirsu, 
and does not seem to have referred to Enannatum I. and 
Entemcna, in whose reigns the events took place. ^ 

But it is in the reforms themselves, which Urukagina 
introduced, that we find the most striking evidence of 
the complete severance he made from the cherished 
traditions of his predecessors. In a series of very 
striking texts, of which we now possess three versions,^ 
he has left us a record of the changes he introduced in 
the internal administration of the country. In the con- 
dition in which at least two of these versions have come 
down to us a literary artifice is employed, which enhances 
and emphasizes in a remarkable degree the drastic 
character of his reforms. Before enumerating these, 
the writer provides a striking contrast by describing 
tlie condition of the country which preceded their intro- 
duction by the king. We are thus confronted with two 
companion pictures, the main features of which corre- 
spond, while their underlying characters are completely 
changed. In the two sections of each text the general 
phraseology is nuich the same, the difference consisting 
in the fact that, while the first describes the oppression 
and injustice which had existed in the state of Lagash 
" since distant days, from the beginning," the second 
section enumerates the reforms by which Urukagina 
claimed that he had ameliorated the people's lot. 
Though some of the references they contain are still 
obscure, the texts afford us a welcome glimpse of the 

' Oval Plaque, Col. IV., 11. 5 ff. The passap^e does not refer to Uruka- 
gina's own reijsrn, as assumed by Meyer, "Geschichte," Bd. I., lift. II., p. 45G. 

2 Cone A, Cones H and C, and the Oval Plaque ; see " Decouvertes en 
Chaldee,'' PP- l.-lii., and I'liurcau Dangin, " Kouigsinscbriften," pp. 44 ff. 


economic conditions that prevailed in Siimer. In con- 
trast to other royal inscriptions found at Tello, they 
give us information concerning the daily life and occupa- 
tions of the people ; and at the same time they reveal 
beneath the official decorum of a Sumerian court an 
amount of oppression and misery, the existence of Avhich 
would not be suspected from tlie pious foundation- 
inscriptions and votive texts of the period. 

The conquests achieved by Lagash during the epoch 
of the great patesis had undoubtedly added considerably 
to the wealth of the city, and had given her, at least for 
a time, the hegemony in Southern Babylonia. But with 
the growth of her power as a state, she lost many of the 
qualities by virtue of which her earlier successes were 
achieved. The simplicity, which characterized the 
patesi's household at a time when he was little more 
than a chief among his fellows, was gradually exchanged 
for the elaborate organization of a powerful court. 
When the army returned laden with booty from distant 
regions, and the tribute of conquered cities kept the 
granaries of Ningirsu filled, it was but natural that 
the rulers of Lagash should surround themselves with 
greater luxury, and should enrich their city by the 
erection of palaces for themselves and sumptuous 
temples for the gods. The long lists of temples and 
other buildings, which occupy the greater part of the 
inscriptions left us by Ur-Nina and his descendants, 
testify to their activity in this direction. It will be 
obvious that the beautill cation of the capital, begun in an 
era of conquest, could not be continued in less fortunate 
times without putting a considerable strain upon the 
resources of the state. In such circumstances the agricul- 
tural section of the population were forced to contribute 
the means for gratifying the ambition of their rulers. 
New taxes were levied, and, to ensure their collection, 
a host of inspectors and other officials were appointed 
whose numbers would constantly tend to increase. 
" Within the limits of the territory of Ningirsu," says 
Urukagina, " there were inspectors down to the sea.' 

" 1 

' Cones B and C, Col. VII., 11. 12 ff. For an interesting discussion of 
many of the official titles occurring on the tablets of the period, see 
Genouillac, " Tabl. sum. arch.," pp. xxiii. ff. 


The palace of the patesi thus began to usurp the 
place in the national life which had formerly been 
held by the temple of the city-god, and, while the 
people found that the tithes due to the latter were 
not diminished, they were fticed with additional taxa- 
tion on all sides. Tax-gatherers and inspectors were 
appointed in every district and for every class of the 
population. The cultivators of the soil, the owners 
of flocks and herds, the fishermen, and the boatmen 
plying on the rivers and canals, were never free from 
the rapacity of these officials, who, in addition to levying 
their dues, appear to have billeted themselves on their 
unfortunate victims. That corruption should have 
existed in the ranks of his officials was but natural, 
when the patesi himself set them an example in the 
matter ; for Urukagina records that his predecessors 
on the throne had appropriated the property of the 
temples for their own use. The oxen of the gods, 
he tells us, were employed for the irrigation of the 
lands given to the patesi ; the good fields of the gods 
formed the patesi's holding and his place of joy.^ The 
priests themselves grew rich at the expense of the 
temples, and plundered the people with impunity. 
The asses and fine oxen which were temple-property 
they carried off, they exacted additional tithes and 
offerings, and throughout the country they entered 
the gardens of the poor and cut down the trees or 
carried off the fruits. But while so doing they kept 
on good terms with the palace officials ; for Urukagina 
records that the priests divided the temple-corn with 
the people of the patesi, and brought them tribute in 
garments, cloth, thread, vessels and objects of copper, 
birds, kids, and the like. 

Tlie misappropriation of temple-property, and par- 
ticularly that of the city-god, afforded Urukagina the 
pretext for inaugurating his reforms. He stood forth 
as Ningirsu's champion, and by restoring the sacred 
lands which had been seized by the palace, he proved 
his own disinterestedness, and afforded his subjects an 
example which he could insist upon their following. 
He states that in the house of the patesi and in the 

» Cones B and C, Col. IV., 11. 9 ff. 


field of the patesi he installed Ningirsu, their master ; 
that in the house of the havini and in the field of the 
harim he installed the goddess Bau, their mistress ; and 
that in the house of the children and in the field of tlie 
children he installed Dunshagga, their master/ In 
these three phrases Urukagina not only records the 
restoration of all the propert5% M'hich had formerly he- 
longed to the temples dedicated to Ningirsu and his 
family, but also reaffirms the old relation of the patesi 
to the city-god. In the character of his representative 
the patesi only received his throne as a trust to be 
administered in the interest of the god ; his fields, and 
goods, and all that he possessed were not his own 
property but Ningirsu's.^ 

After carrying out these reforms, Urukagina pro- 
ceeded to attack the abuses which existed among the 
secular officials and the priests. He cut down the 
numbers of the former, and abolished the unnecessary 
posts and offices which pressed too hardly on the 
people. The granary-inspectors, the fishery-inspectors, 
the boat-inspectors, the inspectors of flocks and herds, 
and, in fact, the army of officials who fsirmed the 
revenue and made a good profit out of it themselves, 
were all deprived of office. Abuses which had sprung 
up and had obtained the recognition accorded to long- 
established custom, were put down with a strong hand. 
All those who had taken money in place of the 
appointed tribute were removed from their posts, as 
were those officials of the palace who had accepted 
bribes from the priests. The priests themselves were 
deprived of many of their privileges, and their scale 
of fees was revised. Burial fees in particular were 
singled out for revision, for they had become extor- 
tionate ; they were now cut down by more than half. 
In the case of an ordinary burial, when a corpse was 
laid in the grave, it had been the custom for the 
presiding priest to demand as a fee for himself seven 
urns of wine or strong drink, four hundred and twenty 
loaves of bread, one hundred and twenty measures of 
corn, a garment, a kid, a bed, and a seat. This 
formidable list of perquisites was now reduced to three 

1 Cones B and C, Col. IX., 11. 7 ff. ^ Cf. Cone A, Col. V. (end). 


urns of wine, eighty loaves of bread, a bed, and a kid, 
while the fee of his assistant was cut down from sixty 
to thirty measures of corn. Similar reductions were 
made in other fees demanded by the priesthood, and 
allowances of wine, loaves, and grain, which were paid 
to various privileged classes and officials in Lagash, 
were revised and regulated. 

As was but natural, oppression and robbery had not 
been confined to the priestly and official classes, but 
were practised with impunity by the more powerful 
and lawless sections of the population, with the result 
that no man's property was safe. In the old days if 
a man purchased a sheep and it was a good one, he 
ran the risk of having it stolen or confiscated. If 
he built himself a fish-pond, his fish were taken and he 
had no redress. If he sunk a well in high ground 
beyond the area served by the irrigation-canals, he 
liad no security that his labour would be for his own 
benefit. This state of things Urukagina changed, both 
by putting an end to the extortions of officials and 
by imposing drastic penalties for theft. At the same 
time, he sought to protect by law the humbler classes 
of his subjects from oppression by their wealthier and 
more powerful neighbours. Thus he enacted that if 
a good ass was foaled in the stable of any subject of the 
king, and his superior should wish to buy it, he should 
only do so by paying a fair price ; and if the OAvner 
refused to part with it, his superior must not molest him. 
Similarly, if the house of a great man lay beside that 
of a humbler subject of the king and he wished to 
buy it, he must pay a fair price ; and if the owner 
was unwilling to sell it, he should have perfect liberty 
to refuse without any risk to himself. The same desire 
to lessen the hardships of the poorer classes is apparent 
in other reforms of Urukagina, by which he modified the 
more barbarous customs of earlier days. One instance 
of such a reform appears to apply to the corvee, or 
some kindred institution ; when engaged in a form of 
forced labour, it had not been the custom to supply 
the workers with water for drinking, nor even to allow 
them to fetch it for themselves — a practice to which 
Urukagina put a stop. 


The extent to whieli the common peoj)le had been 
mulcted of their ])roperty by the oflicials of the palace is 
well illustrated by two of Urukagina's reforms, from 
\vhich it would appear that the patesi himself and his 
chief minister, or grand vizir, had enriched themselves 
by enforcing heavy and unjust fees. One instance 
concerns the practice of divination by oil, which at this 
time seems to have been a not uncommon method of 
foretelling the future. If we may judge from inscrip- 
tions of a rather later period, the procedure consisted in 
pouring out oil upon the surffice of water, the different 
forms taken by the oil on striking the water indicating 
the course which events would take.^ To interpret 
correctly the message of the oil a professional diviner 
was required, and Urukagina relates that not only did 
the diviner demand a fee of one shekel for his services, 
but a similar fee had to be paid to the grand vizir, and 
no less than five shekels to the patesi himself. That 
these fees should have been keenly resented is in itself 
a proof of the extent to which this form of divination 
was practised. Urukagina tells us that after his acces- 
sion the patesi, the vizir, and the diviner took money 
no more ; and, since the latter's fee was also abolished, 
we may probably infer that diviners were a recognized 
class of tlie official priesthood, and were not allowed to 
accept payment except in the form of offerings for the 
temple to which they were attached. 

The otlier matter in which it had been the custom 

of the patesi and his vizir to accept fees was one in 

which the evil effects of the practice are more obvious. 

Urukagina tells us that under the old regime^ if a man 

put away his wife, the patesi took for himself five shekels 

\ of silver and the grand vizir one. It is possible that, 

/ upon their first introduction, these fees were defended 

/ as being a deterrent to divorce. But in practice tliey 

/ had the contrary effect. Divorce could be obtained on 

no grounds whatever by the payment of what was 

V practically a bribe to the officials, with the result that 

the obligations of the marriage tie were not respected. 

» See "Cun. Texts in the Brit. Mns.," Pt. III., pi. 2 ff'., Pt. V., j.l. 4 ff., 
and cf. Hunger, " Becherwahrsagung bei den Babylonierii," in "Leipzig 
Semit. Stud.," I., 1. 



The wives of aforetime, according to Uriikagina, were 

possessed by two men with impunity. AVhile abohsh- 

ing the official fees for divorce, it is probable that 

Urukagina drew up regulations to ensure that it was 

^not abused, and that compensation, when merited, 

should be paid to the woman. On the other hand, we 

/have evidence tliat he inflicted severe punishment for 

/ intidelity on the part of the wife, and we may assume 

that by this means he attempted to stamp out practices 

which were already beginning to be a danger to the 

existence of the community. 

It is interesting to note that the laws referred to by 
Urukagina, in giving an account of the changes he 
introduced, are precisely similar in form to those we 
lind upon the Code of Hammurabi.^ This fact furnishes 
definite proof, not only that Hammurabi codified the 
legislation of earlier times, but also that this legislation 
itself was of Sumerian origin.^ It is probable that 
Urukagina himself, in introducing his reforms, revived 
the laws of a still earlier age, which had been allowed to 
fall into disuse. As Hammurabi ascribed the origin of 
his laws to the Sun-god, whom he represents upon his 
stele as reciting them to, him, so Urukagina regards his 
reforms as due to the direct intervention of Ningirsu, 
his king, whose word it was he caused to dwell in the 
land ;^ and it was not with his people but with Ningirsu 
that he drew up the agreement to observe them.* Like 
Hammurabi, too, Urukagina boasts that he is the 
champion of the weak against the strong ; and he tells 
us that in place of the servitude, which had existed in 
his kingdom, he established liberty." He spoke, and 
delivered the children of Lagash from want, from theft, 

^ On this point cf. also Cuq, " Nouvelle revue liistorique,'' 1908, p. 485. 

2 Tlie principal argument for its Semitic origin was based on a misrender- 
ing oi gnlilhu (see Meyer, " Sum. und Sem.," p. 24, n. 3, and cf. " Geschichte," 
I. 2, p. 512). 

8 Cones B and C, Col. VIII., 11. 10 ff. •» B and C, Col. XII., 11. 20 ff. 

6 Cf. Cone A, Col. VII., and Cones B and C, Col. XII., 1. 21 f. The phrase 
does not imply that slavery was aholislied, but that abuses were put down iu 
the administration of the state. The employment of slaves naturally continued 
to be a recognized institution as in earlier and later periods. In fact, tablets 
of this epoch prove that not only private persons, but also temples could 
possess slaves, and, like domestic animals, they could be dedicated to a god 
for life, 'ilius eight male and three female slaves are mentioned in a list of 
oflFerings made by Amattar-sirsirra, a daugliter of Urukagina, to the god 
Mesandn (cf. Genouillac, "Orient. Lit -Zoit.," IDOO, col. 110 f.). 


from murder and other ills. In his reign, he says, to 
tlie widow and the orplian the strong man did no 

Urukagina's championship of Ningirsu's rights is 
reflected, not only in his rct'orms, but also in the build- 
ings he erected during his reign. Thus we find it 
recorded that, in addition to his great temple E-ninnu, 
he built or restored two other temples in his honour, his 
palace of Tirash, and his great storehouse. Other 
temples were erected in honour of Bau, his wife, and 
of Dunshagga and Galalim, two of Ningirsu's sons, the 
latter of v/hom is first mentioned in Urukagina's texts. 
To Khegir, one of the seven virgin daughters of Ningirsu, 
he dedicated a shrine, and he built another in honour of 
three of her sisters, Zarzari, Impae, and Urnuntaea ; a 
third was dedicated to Ninsar, Ningirsu's sword-bearer. 
It may thus be inferred that Urukagina's building 
operations were mainly devoted to temples and shrines 
of the city-god Ningirsu, and to those dedicated to 
members of his family and household. Like Eannatum 
and Entemena, he also improved the water-supply of the 
city, and cut a canal, or more probably improved an old 
one, for bringing water to the quarter of the city named 
Nina. In connection with it he constructed a reservoir, 
with a capacity of eighteen hundred and twenty gu7\ 
which he made, he tells us, "like the midst of the sea."' 
The small canal of Girsu he also repaired, and he revived 
its former name, " Ningirsu is prince in Nippur."^ This 
furnishes another instance of his policy of restoring to 
Ningirsu honours and privileges of which he had been 
deprived. The reference to Nippur is of interest, for it 
susfcrests that Urukacjina maintained active relations 
with the central cult of Sumer and the north, an 
inference confirmed by his rebuilding of Enhl's temple 
in Lagash, which had been previously built by 

Allusions to cities other than Lagash and its com- 
ponent parts in Urukagina's inscriptions are few, and 

1 Cones B and C, Col. XII., 11. 23 ff. 

2 Cf. Brick, Col IV., Cone A, Col. III., 1. 10, and Cones B and C, Col. II., 
U. 11 fF. 

3 Cones B and C, Col. XII., 11. 29 ff. 


tliose that do occur fail to throw much hght upon tlie 
relations he maintained with other city-states. A small 
object of clay in the form of an oliv^e - has been found, 
which bears the votive inscription : " Ningirsu speaks 
good words with Bau concerning Urukagina in the 
temple of Erech," — a phrase that seems to imply a claim 
on the part of Lagash to suzerainty over that city. 
Another votive object of the same class mentions the 
fortification of the wall of E-babbar,^ but the reference 
here is probably not to the famous temple of the Sun- 
god at Larsa, but to his smaller temple of this name, 
which stood in Lagash and was afterwards desecrated by 
the men of Umma. The only other foreign city 
mentioned in Urukagina's inscriptions is Umma itself, 
whose relations to Lagash in the reigns of Enannatum I. 
and Entemena are briefly recorded.* The text of the 
passage is broken, but we may surmise that the short 
summary of events was intended to introduce an account 
of Urukagina's own relations with that city. We may 
note the fact, which this reference proves, that the 
subsequent descent of the men of Umma upon Lagash 
and their capture and sack of the city were the result of 
friction, and possibly of active hostility, during at least 
a portion of Urukagina's reign. 

From Urukagina's own texts we thus do not gather 
much information with regard to the extent of the 
empire of Lagash under his rule. That he did not 
neglect the actual defences of his city may be inferred 
from his repair of the wall of Girsu ; it is clear, how- 
ever, that his interest was not in foreign conquest, nor 
even in maintaining the existing limits of his dominion, 
but in internal reform. He devoted all his energies to 
purifying the administration of his own land, and to 
stamping out the abuses under which for so long the 
people had suffered. That he benefited the land as a 
whole, and earned the gratitude of his poorer subjects, 
there can be no doubt ; but it is to his reforms them- 
selves that we may trace the immediate cause of the 
downfall of his kingdom. For his zeal had led him to 

' Olive A ; cf. " Decouvortes," p. 1., and " Konigsiuschriften," p. 44 f. 

^ Olive C ; " Konigslnschriften," p. 4i f. 

' Oval riaque, Col. IV., the end of which is wanting ; cf. p. 178, u. 1. 


destroy the long-established metliods of government, 
and, though he thereby put an end to corruption, lie 
tailed to provide an adequate sul)stitute to take their 
place. The host of officials he abolished or dispossessed 
of office had belonged to a military administration, 
which had made the name of Lagash feared, and they 
had doubtless been organized with a view to ensuring 
the stability and protection of the state. Their dis- 
appearance mattered little in times of peace ; though, 
even so, Urukagina must have had trouble with the 
various powerful sections of the population whom he 
had estranged. When war threatened he must have 
found himself without an army and without the means 
of raising one. To this cause we may probably trace 
the completeness of Umma's victory. 

From what we know of the early history of Sumer, 
it would appear that most of its city-states were subject 
to alternate periods of expansion and decay ; and we 
have already seen reason to believe that, before the 
reign of Urukagina, tlie reaction had already set in, 
which must inevitably have followed the conquests of 
the earlier patesis. The struggle for the throne, which 
appears to have preceded Urukagina's accession, must 
have weakened still further the military organization of 
the state ; and when Urukagina himself, actuated by 
the best of motives, attempted to reform and remodel 
its entire constitution, he rendered it still more defence- 
less before the attack of any resolute foe. The city of 
Umma was not slow to take advantage of so favourable 
an opportunity for strikmg at her ancient rival. Hither- 
to in their wars with Lagash the men of Umma, so far 
as we know, had never ventured, or been allowed, to 
attack the city. In earlier days Umma had always 
been defeated, or at any rate her encroachments had 
been checked. It is true that in the records that have 
come down to us the men of Umma are represented 
as always taking the initiative, and provoking hos- 
tilities by crossing the frontier-ditch which marked the 
limit of their possessions. But they nev^er aimed at 
more than the seizure of territory, and the patesi of 
Lagash was always strong enough to check their 
advance, and generally to expel them, before they 


reached the city itself. Indeed, Entcmena had done 
more than this, and, by his capture and annexation of 
Umma, had crippled for a time the resources of this 
ambitious little state. At what period exactly Umma 
repudiated the suzerainty he had imposed is not known ; 
but in any case we may conclude that the effects of the 
chastisement she had received at his hands were suffi- 
cient to prevent for a time any active encroachments 
on her part. 

The renewed activity of Umma during Urukagina's 
reign doubtless followed the lines of her earlier attempts, 
and took the form of a raid into the territory of Lagash. 
The comparative success, which we may conjecture she 
achieved on this occasion, doubtless encouraged her to 
further efforts, and emboldened her patesi to attack the 
city of Lagash itself. The ruler of Umma, under whose 
leadership this final attack was delivered, bore the name 
of Lugal-zaggisi. From an inscription of his own, to 
which further reference will be made in the following 
chapter, we learn that his father Ukush had been patesi 
of Umma before him. We may thus assume that the 
city had for some time enjoyed a position of indepen- 
dence, of which she had taken advantage to husband 
her resources and place her army on a satisfactory 
footing. In any case it was strong enough to overcome 
any opposition that Urukagina could offer, and the city 
of Lagash, which had been beautified and enriched by 
the care of a long line of successful rulers, was laid 
waste and spoiled. 

The document from which we learn details of the 
sack of Lagash is a strange one.^ It closely resembles 
in shape and writing the tablets of household accounts 
from the archive of the patesis, which date from the 
reigns of Urukagina and his immediate predecessors ; ^ 
but the text inscribed upon it consists of an indictment 
of the men of Umma, drawn up in a series of short 
sentences, which recapitulate the deeds of sacrilege 
committed by them. It is not a royal nor an official 
inscription, and, so far as one can judge from its position 

1 See Thureau Dangin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. VI., pp. 20 ff., " Ktinigs- 
iuscliriften," pp. 56 fF. 

2 See above, p. 169 f. 


■when discovered by Commandant Cros, it does not seem 
to have been stored in any regular arcliive or depository. 
For it was unearthed, at a depth of about two metres 
below the surface of the soil, to the north of the mound 
which covered the most ancient constructions at Tcllo,^ 
and no other tablets were found near it. Both from its 
form and contents the document would appear to have 
been the work of some priest, or scribe, who had 
formerly been in Urukagina's service ; and we may 
picture him, after the sack of the city, giving vent to 
his feelings by enumerating the sacred buildings which 
had been profaned by the men of Umma, and laying 
the weight of the great sin committed upon the head 
of the goddess whom they and their patesi served. 
That the composition was written shortly after the fall 
of Lagash may be held to explain the absence of any 
historical setting or introduction ; the city's destruc- 
tion and the profanation of her shrines have so recently 
taken place that the writer has no need to explain the 
circumstances. He plunges at once into his accusations 
against the men of Umma, and the very abruptness of 
his style and the absence of literary ornament render 
their delivery more striking. The repetition of phrases 
and the recurrent use of the same formulce serve only 
to heighten the cumulative effect of the charges he 
brings against the destroyers of his city. 

" The men of Umma," he exclaims, " have set lire 
to the Eki[kala] ; they have set fire to the Antasurra ; 
they have carried away the silver and the precious 
stones ! They have shed blood in the palace of Tirash ; 
they have shed blood in the Abzu-banda ; they have 
shed blood in the shrine of Enlil and in the shrine of 
the Sun-god ; tliey have shed blood in the Akhush ; 
they have carried away the silver and tiie precious 
stones ! They have shed blood in E-babbar ; they 
have carried away the silver and the precious stones ! 
They have shed blood in the Gikana of the goddess 
Ninmakh of the Sacred Grove ; they have carried 
away the silver and the precious stones ! They have 
shed blood in the Baga ; they have carried away the 
silver and the precious stones 1 They have set fire to 

1 Tell K ; see above, pp. 19 f., 90 ff. 


the Dugru ; they have carried away the silver and the 
precious stones 1 They have shed blood in Abzu-ega ; 
they have set fire to the temple of Gatumdiig ; they 
have carried away the silver and the precious stones, 
and have destroyed the statue 1 They have set fire to 
the ... of the temple E-onna of the goddess Ninni ; 
they have carried away the silver and the precious 
stones, and have destroyed the statue 1 They have 
shed blood in the Shagpada ; they have carried away 
the silver and the precious stones ! In the Khenda . . . ; 
they have shed blood in Kiab, the temple of Nindar ; 
they have carried away the silver and the precious 
stones 1 They have set fire to Kinunir, the temple of 
Dumuzi-abzu ; they have carried away the silver and 
the precious stones ! They have set fire to the temple 
of Lugal-uru ; they have carried away the silver and the 
precious stones ! They have shed blood in the temple 
E-engur, of the goddess Nina ; they have carried away 
the silver and the precious stones I They have shed 
blood in the Sag . . ., the temple of Amageshtin ; the 
silver and precious stones of Amageshtin have they 
carried away ! They have removed the grain from 
Ginarbaniru, from the field of Ningirsu, all of it that 
was under cultivation ! The men of Umma, by the 
despoiling of Lagash, have committed a sin against the 
god Ningirsu ! The power that is come unto them, 
from them shall be taken away ! Of sin on the part 
of Urukagina, king of Girsu, there is none. But as 
for Lugal-zaggisi, patesi of Umma, ma)^ his goddess 
Nidaba bear this sin upon her head ! " 

It will be noticed that, in addition to the temples 
in the list, the wTiter mentions several buildings of a 
more secular character,^ but the majority of these were 
attached to tlie great temples and were used in con- 
nection with the produce from the sacred lands. Thus 
the Antasurra, the palace of Tirash, the Akhush, the 
Baga, and the Dugru were all dedicated to the service 
of Ningirsu, the Abzu-banda and the Shagpada to the 
goddess Nina, and the Abzu-ega to Gatumdug. The 
text does not record the destruction of the king's 
palace, or of private dwellings, but there can be little 

* Cf. Genouillac, "Tabl. sum. arch.," pp. xv., ii. 12, xli. 


doubt tliat the whole city was sacked, and the greater 
part of it destroyed by Hre. The writer of the tablet 
is mainly concerned with the sacrilege committed in 
the temples of the gods, and with the magnitude of 
the offence against Ningirsu. He can find no reason 
for the wrongs the city has suffered in any transgression 
on the part of Urukagina, its king ; for Ningirsu has 
had no cause to be angry with his representative. All 
he can do is to protest his belief that the city-god will 
one day be avenged upon the men of Umma and tlieir 
goddess Nidaba. Meanwhile Lagash lay desolate, and 
Umma inherited the position she had held among the 
cities of Southern Babylonia. We know that in course 
of time the city rose again from her ruins, and that the 
temples, which had been laid waste and desecrated, 
were rebuilt in even greater splendour. But, as a state, 
Ijagash appears never to have recovered from the blow 
dealt her by Lugal-zaggisi. At any rate, she never 
again enjoyed the authority which she wielded under 
the rule of her great patesis. 



THE sack and destruction of Lagash, which has 
been described in the preceding chapter, closes 
an epoch, not only in the fortunes of that city, 
but also in the history of the lands of Sumer and 
Akkad. AVhen following the struggles of the early 
city-states, we have hitherto been able to arrange our 
material in strict chronological order by the help of a 
nearly unbroken succession of rulers, whose inscriptions 
have been recovered during the French excavations at 
Tello. These have enabled us to reconstruct the history 
of Lagash herself in some detail, and from the references 
they furnish to other great cities it has been possible 
to estimate the influence she exerted from time to time 
among her neighbours. It is true that the records, from 
which our information is derived, were drawn up by the 
rulers of I^agash whose deeds they chronicle, and are 
naturally far from being impartial authorities. A victory 
may sometimes have been claimed, when the facts may 
not have fully justified it; and to this extent we have 
been forced to view the history of Sumer and of Akkad 
from the standpoint of a single city. Had the sites of 
other cities yielded as rich a harvest as Tello, it is 
probable that otlier states would be found to have 
played no less important parts. But in any case it 
may be regarded as certain that for a time at least 
Lagash enjoyed the hegemony which it was the 
ambition of every state of Sumer and Akkad to possess. 
This leading position had been definitely secured to 
her by the conquests of Eannatum, and, although 
under his successors her influence may have diminished, 



it must have still remained considerable until the 
victory of Umma put an end to it. 

Lugal-zaggisi, the conqueror of I^agash, is mentioned 
by name in the doeinnent from which our knowledge 
of the catastrophe is derived. The unknown writer of 
that composition, as we have already seen, assigns to 
him the title " patesi of Unnna," and, had we no other 
information concerning him, we might perhaps have 
concluded that his success against the ancient rival of 
his own city was merely an isolated achievement. In 
the long-continued struggle between these neighbour- 
ing states Umma had finally proved victorious, and the 
results of this victory might have been regarded as of 
little more than local importance.^ But, even before the 
discovery of the record, Lugal-zaggisi's name was known 
as that of a great conqueror, and it will be seen that his 
defeat of Urukagina was only one step in a career of 
conquest^ in the course of which he subdued the whole 
of Sumer and consolidated a dominion as great as, if not 
greater than, any hitherto acquired by the ruler of a 
city-state. The inscription from which we obtain our 
knowledge of Lugal-zaggisi's career is engra\xd upon a 
number of fragments of vases, made of white calcite 
stalagmite, which were discovered at Nippur during the 
excavations carried out by the University of Pennsyl- 
vania. All the vases were broken into small pieces, but, 
as each had been engraved with the same inscription, it 
was found possible, by piecing the fragments together, 
to reconstruct a more or less complete copy of the text.^ 
From this we learn that I^ugal-zaggisi had dedicated the 
vases to Enlil, and had deposited them as votive 
offerings in the great temple of E-kur. 

Fortunately, Lugal-zaggisi prefaces his record of 
their dedication with a long list of his own titles and 
achievements, which make up the greater part of the 
inscription. From this portion of the text we gather 

' It lias indeed been suggested that, as Urukagina is termed " King of 
Girsu" ill the lament on the fall of Lagash, he may have survived the 
catastroplie and continued to rule as king in (iirsu (cf. Genouiilac, "'J'al)l. 
sum. arch.," p. xvi.) ; but it is scarcely probable that Lugal-zaggisi, after 
sacking and burning the greater part of the city, would have permitted him 
to do so. 

2 See Hilprecht, "Old Bab. Inscr.," Pt. II., No. 87, pU. 38 ff. ; Thureau- 
Dangiu, "Kouigsiuschriften," pp. 152 ff. 



considerable information M'ith regard to the cities under 
his control, and the limits of the empire to which he 
laid claim at the time the record was drawn up. The 
text opens with an enumeration of the royal titles, in 
which Lugal-zaggisi is described as " King of Erech, 
king of the land, priest of Ana, prophet of Nidaba ; 
the son of Ukush, patesi of Umma, the prophet of 
Nidaba ; he who was favourably regarded by Ana, 
the king of the lands ; the great patesi of Enlil ; 
endowed with understanding by Enki ; whose name 
was spoken by Babbar (tlie Sun-god) ; the chief minister 
of Enzu (the iMoon-god) ; the representative of Babbar ; 
the patron of Ninni ; the son of Nidaba, who was 
nourished with holy milk by Ninkharsag ; the servant 
of the god Mes, wlio is the priest of Erech ; the pupil of 
Ninabukhadu, the mistress of Erech ; the great minister 
of the gods." ^ Lugal-zaggisi then goes on to state in 
general terms the limits of his dominion. " When the 
god Enlil, the king of the lands," he says, *' had 
bestowed upon Lugal-zaggisi the kingdom of the land, 
and had granted him success in the eyes of the land, and 
when his might had cast the lands down, and he had 
conquered them from the rising of the sun unto the 
setting of the same, at that time he made straight his 
path from the Lower Sea (over) the Euphrates and the 
Tigris ^ unto the Upper Sea. From the rising of the 
sun unto the setting of the same has Enlil granted him 
dominion. . . ."^ It is to Enlil, the chief of the gods, 
that, in accordance with the practice of the period, he 
ascribes the dominion which has been granted him to 

The phrases in which Lugal-zaggisi defines the 
limits of his empire are sufficiently striking, and it will 
be necessary to enquire into their exact significance. 
But before doing so it will be weU to continue quoting 
from the inscription, which proceeds to describe the 
benefits which the king has conferred upon different 
cities of his realm. Referring to the peace and 

1 Col. I., 11. 4-35. 

2 This rentlering is preferable to " the Lower Sea (of^ the Euphrates and 
the Tigris." 

3 Col. I., 1. 36— Col. II., 1. 16. 


prosperity wliicli characterized I^iigal-zaggisi's reign, the 
record states that '* he caused tlie lands to dwell in 
security, he watered the land witli waters of joy. In 
the shrines of Sunier did they set him up to he tlic patesi 
of the lands, and in Erech (they appointed him) to be 
chief priest. xVt that time he made Erech bright with 
joy ; like a bull he raised the head of Ur to heaven ; 
Larsa, the beloved city of the Sun-god, he watered with 
waters of joy ; Umma, the beloved city of the god . . ., 
he raised to exalted power ; as a ewe that . . . her 
lamb, has he made TS' inni-esh resplendent ; the summit 
of Kianki has he raised to heaven."^ Then follows the 
votive portion of the text and the prayer of dedication, 
with which for the moment we have no concern. 

From the extracts which have been quoted from 
Lugal-zaggisi's inscription, it will have been seen that he 
claims a jurisdiction far wdder than might have been 
expected to belong to a patesi of Umma. But the text 
itself explains the apparent discrepancy, and shows that, 
while Lugal-zaggisi's inheritance was a patesiate, he 
won by his own exertions the empire over which he 
subsequently ruled. It will be noticed that while 
he claims for himself the titles " King of Erech " and 
" king of the land," i.e. of Sumer, he ascribes to his 
father Ukush only the title " patesi of Umma." It is 
therefore clear that his father's authority did not reach 
beyond the limits of his native city, and we may 
conclude that such was the extent of the patesiate of 
Umma when Lugal-zaggisi himself came to the throne. 
The later titles, which he assumes on the vases found at 
Nippur, prove tliat at the time they were inscribed he 
had already established his autliority throughout Sumer 
and had removed his seat of government from Umma 
to Erech. That the latter city had become his capital 
is clear from the precedence which he gives to the 
designation " King of Erech " over his other titles of 
honour ; and, in accordance with this change of resi- 
dence, he details the new relations into which he has 
entered with the deities of that city. Thus he is the 
servant of Mes and the pupil of Ninabukhadu, tlie 
divine priest and the mistress of Erech ; and in a special 

1 Col. II., 1. 17-Col. 111,1. 2. 


sense he has become tlie putron of Xiiiiii, the chief seat 
of whose worship was at Erech, in her great temple 
E-anna. Ann, too, the fatlier of the gods, had his 
temple in Erech, and so Lugal-zaggisi naturally became 
liis priest and enjoyed his special favour. It was pro- 
bably in consequence of Ana's close connection with his 
new capital that I^ugal-zaggisi ascribes to him the title 
*' king of tlie lands," which by right belonged only to 
Enlil of Xi})})ur ; and we may note that in the prayer of 
dedication on the vases it is with Ana that Enlil is 
besouijfht to intercede on belialf of the king/ 

Although Lugal-zaggisi had changed his capital and 
no longer continued to use his father's title as patesi of 
Umma, he naturally did not neglect his native city ; 
moreover, he retained the title '* propliet of Nidaba," 
and thereby continued to claim the protection of the 
city-goddess, who, before his recent victories, had been 
his patroness and that of his father before him. He 
even emphasized his dependence upon her by styling 
himself her son, and in another passage he boasts that 
he had raised the city of Umma to power. High in 
his favour also stood Ur, the city of the Moon-god, and 
Larsa, the city of the Sun-god ; and the less-known 
cities of Ninni-esh and Kianki are also selected for 
mention as having been specially favoured by him. At 
first sight it is not clear on what principle the names of 
these cities are selected from among all those in the 
land of Sumer, which were presumably within the circle 
of his authority. That Erech, Ur, and Larsa should be 
referred to is natural enough, for they were close to one 
anotlier, and would thus form the centre and nucleus of 
his dominion ; and the king Avould naturally devote 
himself to improving their canalization and beautifying 
them by the erection of new buildings. It is not im- 
probable that we may explain the mention of Ninni-esh 
and Kianki on the same principle : they probably stood 
in the immediate neighbourliood of the three greater 
cities, or of Umma, and tlms participated in tlie benefits 
which they enjoyed. 

In any case, the absence of a city's name from 
Lugal-zaggisi's list is not necessarily to be taken as 

* See below, p. I'M 


impl\ini)- that it was not included within tlie hniits of 
his dominion. This is proved by tlie tact that I.a^ash 
is not referred to, altliongh it was proba])ly one of his 
earhest eonquests. In fact, tlie king's object in corn- 
posing the earlier part of his inscription was not to give 
an accurate analysis of the extent and condition of his 
empire, but merely to enumerate the cities he had 
particularly favoured, and to record the names of those 
deities with whom he stood in particularly close relations. 
For instance, we may conclude that although the city 
of Eridu is not referred to by name, it nevertheless 
formed part of Lugal-zaggisi's kingdom. There is thus 
every reason to regard his dominion as having been 
co-extensive with the whole of Sumer, and his title 
" king of the land " was probably based on a confedera- 
tion of all the Sumerian city-states. 

A more difficult problem is presented by what at 
first sight appears to be a claim to a still wider empire, 
which follows Lugal-zaggisi's titles at the end of the 
first and the beginning of the second column of his 
inscription. He here states that, after Enlil had be- 
stowed on him the kingdom of the land (that is, of 
Sumer), and had granted him success in the eyes of the 
land, and when his might had cast the lands down and he 
had conquered them from East to West, at that time 
Enlil " made straight his path from the Lower Sea 
(over) the Euphrates and the Tigris unto the Upper 
Sea."' The J^ower Sea is clearly the Persian Gulf, 
and by the Upper Sea it is probable that the Medi- 
terranean is intended, rather than Lake Urmi or Lake 
Van. On the basis of this passage I^ugal-zaggisi has 
been credited with having consolidated and ruled an 
empire extending from the Persian Gulf to the shores 
of the Mediterranean.'^ In other words, he would have 
included Akkad and Syria along with Sumer within 
the limits of his rule. 

It is true that Shar-Gani-sharri of Akkad, at a rather 
later period, did succeed in establishing an empire of 

S?PP 3.DOVP T^ 1^4 

2 See Hilprecht, " Explorations in Bible Lanf!?," p. 384. In connection 
with this view, his earlier theory that Umma was llarran (cf. " Old Bab. 
Inscr.," Pt. II., pp. 54 ff.) he has, of course, given up. 


this extent, but there are difficulties in the way of 
crediting Lugal-zaggisi with a Hke achievement. For 
Erech, the capital of his kingdom, was in Southern 
Babylonia, and, unlike the city of Akkad, was not well 
adapted to form the centre of an administrative area 
extending so far to the north and west. JNIoreover, 
the actual phrase employed by Lugal-zaggisi does not 
necessarily imply a claim to dominion within these 
regions, but may be taken as commemorating little 
more than a victorious raid, during w^hich he may have 
penetrated to tlie Syrian coast. Such an expedition, 
so far as we know, must have marked a new departure 
from the policy hitherto followed by the rulers of 
Sumerian city-states, and its successful prosecution 
would have fully justified the language in Avhich it is 
recorded. In view of these considerations, it is prefer- 
able to regard I^ugal-zaggisi's kingdom, in the strict 
sense of the word, as having been confined to Sumer. 
Of his relations to Akkad and the northern cities we 
have no evidence on which to form an opinion. We 
shall presently see reasons for believing that at about 
this period, or a little later, the state of Kish secured 
the hegemony in Northern Babylonia, and, in view of 
the absence of any reference to it in Lugal-zaggisi's 
inscription, we may perhaps conclude that in his time 
the city had already laid the foundations of its later 

It was probably after his successful return from the 
long expedition in the north-west that Lugal-zaggisi 
deposited his vases as votive offerings within Enlil's 
shrine at Nippur, and engraved upon them the inscrip- 
tions from which we obtain our information concerning 
his reign. In the third column of his text he states 
that he has dedicated them to Enlil, after having made 
due offerings of loaves in Nippur and having poured out 
pure water as a libation. He then adds a prayer of 
dedication, in which he prays for life for himself, and 
peace for his land, and a large army. " May Enlil, the 
king of the lands," he says, " pronounce my prayer 
to Ana, his beloved father ! To my life may he add 
life I May he cause the lands to dwell in security 1 
Warriors as numerous as the grass may he grant me in 


abundance! Of the celestial folds may he take care I 
May he look with kindness on the land (of Sumer) ! 
May the gods not alter the good destiny tliey have 
assigned to me I May I always be the shepherd, who 
leads (his flock) I " ' We may regard it as typical of the 
great conqueror that he should pray for a supply of 
warriors " as numerous as the grass." 

It is fortunate for our knowledge of early Sumerian 
history that the shrine of Enlil at Nippur should have 
been the depository for votive offerings, brought thither 
by the rulers of city-states to commemorate their 
victories. Of the inscribed objects of this class that 
were recovered at Nippur during the American excava- 
tions on that site, by far the most important are the 
vase-fragments of Lugal-zaggisi, which have already 
been described. But others were found, Aviiich, though 
supplying less detailed information, are of considerable 
value, since they furnish the names of other rulers of 
Sumer, who may probably be grouped wutli lAigal- 
zaggisi. Two kings of this period are I^ugal-kigub- 
nidudu and Lugal-kisalsi, each of whom bore the 
title " King of Erech" and " King of Ur," wliile the 
former, like Lugal-zaggisi, styles himself in addition 
"king of the land," i.e. of Sumer. Their inscriptions 
were found in the mound of Nippur at about the same 
level as the vase-fragments of Lugal-zaggisi, and a 
comparison of the characters employed in each set of 
texts suggests that they date from about the same 

That Lugal-kigub-nidudu aad Lugal-kisalsi are in 
any case to be set before the time of Shar-Gani-sharri 
of Akkad is proved by the fact that one of the rough 
blocks of diorite, which the former had dedicated to 
Enlil after inscribing his name upon it, was afterwards 
used by Shar-Gani-sharri as a door-socket in the temple 
he erected at Nippur.^ Whether they lived still earlier 
than Lugal-zaggisi it is difficult to decide. The longest 
inscription of Lugal-kigub-nidudu which has been 
recovered is engraved upon a vase which he deposited 
as a votive offering in Enlil's temple, and from the 

» Col. III., 11. 14—30. 

^ See Hilprecht, "Old Bab. Inscr.," Pt. I., p. 47, No. 1 ; Pt. H., p. 46. 


introductory phrases preceding the dedication it would 
appear that he founded a kingdom, or at any rate 
enlarged one which he already possessed. " When 
Enlil, the king of the lands," the passage runs, " (had 
spoken) to Lugal-kigub-nidudu and had addressed a 
favourable word to him, and had united the dominion 
with the kingdom, of Erech he made a dominion, of 
Ur he made a kingdom."^ It would thus seem that 
Lugal-kigub-nidudu had at first been possessed of 
only one of the two cities, Erech or Ur, and that 
he subsequently acquired the other, probably by con- 
quest, and proceeded to rule them both under separate 

Too much emphasis is not to be set on the fact that 
he describes his rule of Erech as a lordship or a 
dominion, while he styles that of Ur a kingdom ; for 
the difference in these phrases was not very marked in 
the pre-Sargonic period, and it is to be noted that Erech 
is mentioned before Ur. Moreover, Lugal-kisalsi assigns 
the title " King of Erech " as well as " King of Ur " to 
his predecessor as to himself, and, since he places the 
former title first, it is probable that Erech and not 
Ur was their capital. But even on this assumption it 
does not follow that Erech was Lugal-kigub-nidudu's 
native city, for we have seen that when Lugal-zaggisi 
conquered Sumer he transferred his capital to Erech, 
and I^ugal-kigub-nidudu may have done the same. 
The fact that at a later period Gudea, when rebuilding 
the temple E-ninnii, came across a stele of Eugal- 
kisalsi ^ suggests that he exercised authority over 
Lagash ; and we may probably conclude that both he 
and Lugal-kigub-nidudu included the principal cities 
of Southern Babylonia under their sway. That Lugal- 
kisalsi followed and did not precede Lugal-kigub-nidudu 
upon the dual throne of Erech and Ur is certain from one 
of his votive inscriptions,^ which contains a reference to 
the earlier king. The beginning of the text is wanting, 
so that it is not clear whether he mentions him as 
his father or in some other connection. In any case 

» "Old Bab. Inscr.,"Pt. II., No. 6, p. 57 f. ; " Konigsinschrifteii," p. 166 f. 

2 See below, Chap. IX., p. 2(58. 

» " Old Bab. Inscr.," PtII., No. 80 6, pi. 37, p. 68. 


we may assume tliat he followed him at no long 
interval ; but it is not yet certain wliether we are to 
set their reigns in Sumer before or after that of Lugal- 

The same uncertainty applies to another ruler of 
this period, ^vho bore the name of Enshagkushanna 
and assumed the titles "lord of Sumer " and "kins: of 
the land." Two of his inscriptions have been recovered 
upon fragments of vases, which were found at Nippur 
at the same level as those already described, and one of 
these is of considerable interest, for it gives us the name 
of an enemy of Sumer who has already bulked largely 
in the earlier history of Lagash/ The inscription in 
question consists of only a few words, and reads : 
" Enshagkushanna has vowed to Enlil the booty of 
Kish, the wicked."^ It is clear from the epithet applied 
to Kish that at this period, as in the time of Eannatum, 
the northern city was a terror to the Sumerian states in 
the south, and we may assume that war between them 
was not of infrequent occurrence. It was after some 
successful raid or battle in the north that Enshag- 
kushanna dedicated a portion of the spoil to Enlil in 
his temple of E-kur. Similar fragments of vases have 
been found at Nippur, the inscriptions upon which 
testify to other successes against Kish, achieved by a 
king of Sumer, who probably reigned at a period rather 
earlier than Enshagkushanna, Lugal-kigub-nidudu, and 
even Lugal-zaggisi. 

Although fragments of no less than four of his vase- 
inscriptions have been discovered,^ the name of this 
Sumerian king unfortunately does not occur on any 
one of them. In the longest of the texts he takes the 
title of "king," and in the gap that follows we may 
probably restore the phrase " of the land," that is, of 
Sumer ; on two of them, like the other Sumerian kings 
we have referred to, he ascribes his installation in the 
government of the country to Enlil, the god of Nippur. 
AH four inscriptions were drawn up on the same 
occasion, and commemorate a striking ^dctory this 

' See above, pp. 99 ff., 144 ff. 

2 " Old Bab. Inscr.," Pt. II., pi. 43, Nos. 91 and 92. 

3 Op. cit., PI. 45 i., Nos. 102-105, 110. 


unknown Sumerian ruler had achieved over the northern 
cities of Kish and Opis. Of the two conquered cities 
Kish was clearly the more important, for its devastation 
is recorded in each of the texts, whereas Opis is only 
mentioned in one of them. Each city was ruled by 
a separate king, w^hose overthrow is recorded on the 
vases, but, since they were defeated in the same battle, 
we may conjecture that they formed the centre of a 
single confederation or dominion, of which Kish was 
the head. In two of the texts the king of Kish is 
referred to, not only by his title, but by name, and, 
since he bore the Semitic name of Enbi-Ishtar, we may 
conclude that at this period Kish, and probably Opis 
and other northern cities, were already under Semitic 
domination. In the war these cities were waging with 
the south, the vases record what appears to have been a 
serious check to the increase of Semitic influence and 
power. For not only was Enbi-Ishtar defeated, but 
both Kish and Opis were sacked, and the Sumerian 
king returned southward laden with booty, including 
statues, precious metals, and rare stones. The vases 
on which he recorded his victory formed part of the 
spoil captured in the north. They were fashioned of 
wliite calcite stalagmite, dark brown sandstone, and 
dark brown tufa or igneous rock. In the land of 
Sumer, where stone was a rare commodity, these were 
highly prized objects, and they formed a fitting thank- 
offering for presentation at Enlil's shrine. 

We have already referred to the question as to the 
nationality of the still earlier kings of Kish, JNIesilim 
and his successors, some of wliom we know to have 
been contemporary with the earlier rulers of Lagash. 
At that period the northern city had already succeeded 
in imposing its autliority upon some of the city-states of 
Sumer, and later on both Kish and Opis are proved to 
have been engaged in active warfare in the south. Too 
little evidence is available for determining definitely 
whether these earlier kings and patesis were of Sumerian 
or Semitic stock, but there is much to be said in favour 
of regarding the later conflicts between the north and 
south as merely a continuation of the earlier struggle. 
With Enbi-Ishtar we meet at any rate with a name 


that is genuinely Semitic,' and we sliall presently see 
reasons for believing that other Semitic kings of Kish, 
whose inscriptions and monuments have been recovered, 
should be placed in the same period. According to 
this view, as we have already pointed out,*^ the first 
Semitic immigration into Nortliern Babylonia, or 
^Vkkad, is not to be synchronized with the empire ol 
Akkad, which was founded by Shar-Gani-sharri and 
consolidated by Naram-Sin. In spite of the absence 
of Semitic idiom from the few short votive inscriptions 
of the earlier kings of Kish that have as yet been found, 
the possibility must not be disregarded that they too 
date from a period of Semitic and not of Sumerian 
domination in the north. At Sippar also we have 
evidence of very early Semitic occupation. 

One of this later group of kings of Kish, whose 
inscriptions prove them to have been Semites, is Uru- 
mush, or llimush,^ and, although in all probability the 
latest of them, he may be referred to first, since we 
have definite evidence that he is to be assigned to tlie 
epoch preceding Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin. In 
an unpublished tablet from Tello, preserved in the 
INluseum at Constantinople, there occurs the proper 
name Ili-Urumush, "My god is Urumush."* The 
deification of some of the early kings of Babylonia has 
long been recognized as having taken place, at any 
rate from tlie time of Shar-Gani-sharri ; and we have 
evidence that the honour was not only paid to them 
after death, but was assumed by the kings themselves 
during their own lifetime.^ The occurrence of a proper 
name such as Ili-Urumush can only be explained on 
the supposition that a king bearing the name of Uru- 
mush had already reigned, or was reigning at the time 

^ With it we may compare the name Thibu-ilum on the Obelisk of Manish- 
tiisu, Face A, Col. IX., 1. 24,Col.XIII., 1.17 ("Delegation en Perse,"Mem. 11., 
pll. 2 and 3). 

2 See above. Chap. II., p. 52 f. 

2 The name has aLso been read as Alu-usharshid, but the phonetic 
Sumerian rendering Uru-mu-ush is now in general use. A preferable reading 
would be the Semitic Ri-mu-ush, Rimush (cf. King, " Proc. Ribl. Arch.," 
XXX., p. 239, n. 2), since the sign uru at this period was commonly employed 
with the value rU But, in order to avoid unnecessary confusion, tlie accepted 
reading Urumush is retained in the text. 

* Cf. Thuroan-Dangin, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1908, col. 313 f. 

6 See further, pp. 261, 273 f., 288, 301 f. 


the former name was employed. Now, the tablet in 
Constantinople, which mentions the name of Ili-Uru- 
mush, is undated, but from its form, writing, and con- 
tents it may clearly be assigned to the same epoch as 
certain dated tablets of Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram- 
Sin witli which it was found. From this it follows that 
Urumush was anterior to Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram- 
Sin, though his reign may not have been separated from 
theirs by any long interval. 

We have but a few short inscriptions of Urumush, 
and those of a votive character, but they enable us to 

form some estimate of the 
extent and condition of his 
empire. The only designation 
he assumes in those of his 
inscriptions that have been 
recovered is " King of Kish," 
so that we are without the 
information which might have 
been derived from a study of 
his subsidiary titles. Such 
titles would no doubt have 
been added in any lengthy 
text, and their absence from 
his known inscriptions is sim- 
ply due to their brevity. On 
the other hand, the fact that 

White marble vase, engraved tllCSe sllOrt inscriptions haVC 
with the name and title of Uru- t.„„ i' „J „ '4. 'J^ 

mush, King of Kish. From Nifier. beCU tound OU SltCS SO Widely 

[Pennsylvania Museum, No. 8870.] scattered aS Abu Habba, 

NifFer, and Tello, is probably 
significant. The inscriptions from Abu Habba ^ and 
Tello consist simply of his name and title engraved on 
fragments of stone vases, and, since they bear no 
dedication to a local deity, they might possibly have 
been carried there as spoil from Kish. But fragments 
of precisely similar vases, bearing the same inscription, 
have been found at Niffer, and, as the texts upon two 
other vases from the latter place prove that they were 

' The vase-inscription of Urumush in the British Museum was found at 
Abu Habba, not at Niffer or Tello as implied l)y 'l"hureau-Dangin, "Konigs- 
inschriften," p. IGO. 

FiQ. 56. 


deposited there by Uniniusli hiinself, it is a fair assump- 
tion that tlicir presence on the other two sites is to 
be explained in tlie same way. Me may therefore 
conchide that both Sippar and Lagash were under the 
control of Uriunush. In other words, it is not im- 
probable that the limits of his authority in l^ubylonia 
extended from the extreme north of Akkad to the 
south of Sumer. 

It is fully in accordance with this view that 
Urunuish should have controlled the central sanctuary 
at Nip})ur, and his vases found upon that site, which 
bear dedications to Enlil, prove that this was so. From 
one of them we learn too that the power of Kish was 
felt beyond the limits of Sumer and Akkad. The text 
in question states that the vase upon which it is 
inscribed formed part of certain spoil from Elam, and 
was dedicated to Enlil by Urumush, " when he had 
conquered Elam and Barakhsu."^ It is possible that 
the conquest of Elam and the neighbouring district of 
Barakhsu, to which Urumush here lays claim, was not 
more than a successful raid into those countries, from 
which he returned laden with spoil. But even so, 
the fact that a king of Kish was strong enough to 
assume the offensive against Elam, and to lead an 
expedition across the border, is sufficiently noteworthy. 
The references to Elam which we have hitherto 
noted in the inscriptions from Tello would seem 
to suggest that up to this time the Elamites had 
been the aggressors, and had succeeded in penetrating 
into Sumerian territory from which they were with 
difficulty dislodged. Under Urumush the conditions 
were reversed, and we shall shortly see reason for 
believing that his success was not a solitary achieve- 
ment, but may be connected with other facts in the 
history of Kish under the Semitic rulers of this period. 
Meanwhile we may note the testimony to the power 
and extent of the kingdom of Kish, which is furnished by 
the short inscriptions of his reign. Later tradition relates 
that Urumush met his end in a palace revolution ; ^ but 

1 See Ililprecht, " Old Bab. Iiiscr./' I., No. 5, p. 20 f. 

■^ See Boissier, " Choix de textes relatifs a la divination," I., pp. 44, 531 ; 
Jastrow, '• Die Religion Babvloniens uud Assyriens," II.. p. 333 ; and " Zeits. 
fur Assyr./' XXI. (1908), pp. 277 ff. 


the survival of his name in the omen-Uterature of the 
later Babylonians and Assyrians is further evidence of 
tlie important part he played in the early history of 
their country. 

Another king of Kish, whose name has been re- 
covered in short votive inscriptions from Abu Habba^ 
and NifFer is JNIanishtusu.^ But fortunately for our 
knowledge of his reign, we possess a monument, which, 
though giving little information of an historical nature, is 
of the greatest value for the light it throws upon the 
Semitic character of the population and the economical 
conditions which prevailed in Northern Babylonia at the 
time it was drawn up. This monument is the tamous 
Obelisk of INIanishtusu,^ which was discovered by M. de 
Morgan at Susa, during his first season's work on that 
site in the winter of 1897-8. On the obelisk is engraved 
a text in some sixty-nine columns, written in Semitic 
Babylonian, and recording the purchase by JManishtusu 
of large tracts of cultivated land situated in the neigh- 
bourhood of Kish and of three other cities in Northern 
Babylonia. Each of the four sides of the stone is 
devoted to a separate area or tract of land, near one of 
the four great cities. Thus the first side records the 
purchase of certain land made up of three estates and 
known as the Field of Baz, which lay near the city of 
Dur-Sin ; the second side records the purchase of the 
Field of Baraz-sirim, near the city of Kish, Manishtusu's 
capital ; the third side, like the first, deals with three 
estates, and these together were known as the JMeadow 
(or, strictly, tlie Marsh) of Ninkharsag, near the city of 
Marad ; while the fourth side is concerned with the 
purchase of the Field of Shad-Bitkim and Zimanak, 
near a city tlie name of which may be provisionally 
rendered as Shid-tab.* The great length of the inscription 

' Tlie mace-liead, dedicated to the goddess NiuA, which is preserved in 
the British Museum, was found at Abii Habba ; see the opposite plate. 

2 Such is the form of tlie name in his own in-jcriptions. The reading is 
substantiated by the variants Mnnishftuzzii and Manishdusim, which occur in 
Anzanite , inscriptions (see Scheil, " Textes Elam.-Anzan./^ I,, p. 42, and 
"Textes Elam.-Serait.," IV., p. 1 ; cf. also Hoschander, " Zeits. fiir Assj'r. ," 
XX., p. 246). 

3 See Scheil, "Textes Elam.-Sdmit.," I., pp. 1 ff. (" De'le'g. en Perse/' 
Mem. II.), and Hrozny, " \Viener Zeitschrift, XXI., pp. 11 ff. 

* The true pronunciation of tlie name is uncertain. 


^ ^ 


MACK-HKAli |ii:i)irA Tl-.l) I O llll-: (iOli MI'.SI.AMI Ai: A n\ r,l-. 1 1 \ 1 1- OK I iT N( ; I. 

K.1N(; OF IR: AM) MACK-HKAl) DKDICATKI ) iO A KIJIA ok 1 1 1. 1 11 KS 

1!V I.ASIKAU, kINC, Ol- (irill. 

Ihit. Mils.. Xos. QK174 n>iii cin&^7.. 

UKl'klvSKN TAI ION IN 1 >I()K 11 l. Ol A WOMAN'S llAlk. I )1 .1 )U. A M:I ) !( ) 

/)'■/■/ l/;/.v.. A'.ij. gi075 rtWi/ 9101S. 


is due to the fact that, in addition to giving details 
with regard to the size, vahie, and position of each 
estate, the text enumerates by name the various pro- 
prietors from whom the land was purchased, the former 
overseers or managers who were dispossessed, and the 
new overseers who were installed in their place. The 
names of the latter are repeated on all four sides of 
the obelisk before the purchase-formula. 

We may note the fact that INIanishtusu did not 
confiscate the land, but acquired it legally by purchase, 
as though he were merely a private citizen or large 
land-owner. The exact area of each estate was first 
accurately ascertained by measurement, and its value 
was then reckoned in grain and afterwards in silver, one 
bicr of land being regarded as worth sixty gur^ of grain, 
or one mana of silver. An additional sum, consisting 
of one-tenth or three- twentieths of the purchase-price, 
was also paid to the owners of each estate, who received 
besides from the king presents of animals, garments, 
vessels, etc., which varied in value according to the 
recipient's rank or his former share in the property. 
Not only are the owners' names and parentage duly 
recorded on the stone, but also those of certain 
associates who had an interest in the land ; most of 
these appear to have been relatives of the owners, who 
had contributed capital for the cultivation or improve- 
ment of the estates. Their names were doubtless 
included in order to prevent any subsequent claim 
being raised by them against the king. The same 
reason appears to have dictated the enumeration by 
name of the former managers or overseers of each estate, 
who by its purchase were deprived of their occupation. 
The cultivation of the large tracts of land, which passed 
into the king's possession, had given employment to no 
less than fifteen hundred and sixty-four labourers, who 
had been in the charge of eighty-seven overseers. It is 
worthy of note that Manishtusu undertook to find fresh 
occupation and means of support for both these classes 
in other places, which were probably situated at no 
great distance from their homes. 

The reason for this extensive purchase of landed 
property by Manishtusu may possibly have been given 


at the bcoinninu^ of the text inscribed upon the o})ehsk, 
l)ut uiil'ortiinutcly very little of the first column of the 
inscription has been preserved. The main body of tlie 
text affords little material on which to base a con- 
jecture. One point, however, may be regarded as 
certain : the reason for the purchase appears to have 
had some close connection with the forty-nine new 
manatrers and overseers, to whom Manishtusu entrusted 
the administration of his newly acquired property. The 
mere fact that their names and descriptions should have 
been repeated on each side of the obelisk is probably 
significant. INIoreover, they are all described in the 
text as citizens ^ of iVkkad, and the prominence given 
to them in each section suggests that the king purchased 
the land with the express object of handing it over 
to their charge. It may also be noted that INIanishtusu 
removed, not only the former managers, but also every 
labourer who had been employed on the estates, so that 
we may assume that the new managers brought their 
own labourers with them, who would continue the 
cultivation of the land under their direction. If the 
king's object in purchasing the land had been merely 
to make a profitable investment, he w^ould not have 
removed the former labourers, for whose maintenance 
he undertook to provide elsewhere. INIanishtusu's action 
can only be explained on the supposition that he was 
anxious to acquire land on w^hich he might settle the 
men from Akkad and their adherents. The purchase 
appears therefore to have been dictated by the necessity 
of remo^•ing certain citizens from Akkad to other sites 
in Northern Babylonia. We do not know the cause 
which gave rise to this transference of population, but 
we shall presently see that, in view of the high social 
standing of several of the immigrants, Manishtusu's 
action may perhaps be connected with certain traditions 
concerning tliis period which were current in later 
times. ^ 

At tlie head of the inhabitants from ^Vkkad, to whom 
the king handed over his new estates, stands Aliakhu, 
liis nephew, and among them we also find sons and 
dependants of the rulers of important cities, who appear 

1 Literally, "sous," « See below, Cbap. Mil., pp. 238 ff. 


to have acknowledged the suzerainty of Kish. Thus 
two of the men are described as from the household of 
Kur-shesh, patesi of Umma ; ^ another was Ibalum, the 
son of Ilsu-rabi, patesi of Basime ; and a third was 
Urukagina, son of Engilsa, patesi of Lagash. The 
reference to the last of these four personages has been 
employed in an attempt to fix the period of Manishtusu's 
reign. On the discovery of the obelisk P^re Scheil 
proposed that we should identify Urukagina, the son of 
Engilsa, with the king of Lagash of that name, sug- 
gesting that he occupied the position assigned him in 
the text during his father's lifetime and before he him- 
self succeeded to the throne.^ At this time it was still 
the fashion to set Urukagina at the head of the patesis 
of Tello, and to regard him as the oldest of all the 
rulers of that city whose names had yet been recovered. 
Now, on the obelisk mention is also made of a certain 
"Me-sa-lim, the son of the king,"^ i.e. a son of Manish- 
tusu. Support for the proposed identification was 
therefore found in the further suggestion that JMesalim, 
the son of Manishtusu, was no other than Mesilim, the 
early king of Kish, who was the contemporary of 
Lugal-shag-engur of Lagash, and, in his character of 
suzerain, had interposed in the territorial dispute between 
that city and Umma.* According to this view, Lagash, 
under Engilsa and Urukagina, owed allegiance to Kish 
during the reign of Manishtusu, a state of things which 
continued into the reign of Mesilim, who, on this theory, 
was Manishtusu's son and successor. 

But the recognition of Urukagina's true place in the 
line of the rulers of Lagash has rendered the theorj'' 
untenable ; and the suggested identification of Mesalim, 
the son of Manishtusu, with Mesilim, the early king of 
Kish, so far from giving support to the other proposal, 
is quite incompatible with it. In fact, both the pro- 
posed identifications cannot be right, and it remains to 

* The phrase employed possibly implies that they were his grandsons ; 
see Hrozny, " VVieu. Zeits.," XXI., p. VJ, n. 2, pp. 29, 40. 

2 Scheil, " Textes Elam.-Se'mit,," I., p. 2. 

^ The estate described on the second side of the obelisk is stated to have 
been bounded on its eastern side by the field of Mesalim ; see Face ii, 
Col. VI., 11. 12-14. 

* See above, pp. 99 ff. 



be seen whether either of them can be accepted. Of 
the two, the proposal to identify Mesalim with I^ugal- 
shag-cngur's contemporary may be dismissed at once, 
since botli the internal and the external evidence 
furnished by the obelisk are against assigning Manish- 
tusu's reign to so early a period. Although these 
objections do not apply so strongly to the other pro- 
posal, its acceptance is negatived on other grounds. 
From Urukagina's own inscriptions we liave seen reason 
to believe that he did not obtain the throne by right of 
succession, but by force ; he never refers to his o^vn 
fatlier, and the antagonism to the patesiate, which 
characterizes his texts, suggests that his reign marks 
a complete break in the succession.^ We may therefore 
conclude that Urukagina of the obelisk is a different 
personage to Urukagina, the king, and the former's 
father, Engilsa, would in that case have ruled as a 
patesi of Lagash at a period subsequent to the sack of 
that city by Lugal-zaggisi.^ 

We are therefore reduced to more general con- 
siderations in attempting to fix the date of Manishtusu. 
That his reign is to be assigned to about the same 
period as that of Urumush there can be little doubt, 
for, in contrast to those of the earlier kings of Kish, the 
inscriptions of both are WTitten in Semitic Babylonian, 
and the forms of the characters they employ are very 
similar. Evidence has already been cited which proves 
that Urumush was anterior to Shar-Gani-sharri and 
Naram-Sin. In Manishtusu, therefore, we have another 
Semitic king under whom the city of Kisli enjoyed the 
hegemony in Babylonia, which afterwards passed to 
Akkad. That the kingdom of Kish, under these two 
rulers, was not separated by a long interval from the 
empire of Akkad would seem to follow from the refer- 
ences to tlie latter city on Manishtusu's obelisk.^ We 
have already noted that the forty-nine overseers, who 
were entrusted with the administration of the lands 
purchased by tlie king, are described in the text as 

' See above, p. 17<5 f. 

2 'Hie ineiition of the name Engilsa on a tablet from Tello in connection 
with that of Urukagina's wife may be merely a coincidence ; it has, however, 
been cited in support of the identification (see above, p. 170, n. 2). 

3 See further, Chap. VIIl., pp. 228 ff. 


citizens of Akkad, and that among their number are 
members of powerful ruhng famihes from other cities 
of Babylonia. It would thus appear that Akkad was 
already of sufficient importance to attract princes from 
such distant cities as Umma and Latrash. This fact, 
indeed, has been employed as an argument in favour of 
the view that INIanishtusu and Urumush must have 
ruled after, and not before, Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram- 
sin/ under whom Akkad was made the capital of the 
whole country. Although this inference does not 
necessarily follow, and, in point of fact, is contradicted 
by the evidence already cited with regard to Urumush, 
it is clear that, even in the time of IManishtusu, the city 
of Akkad enjoyed a position of considerable importance ; 
and it is improbable that any long period elapsed before 
it replaced Kish as the capital. 

The extent of JNIanishtusu's authority within the 
Umits of Babylonia is indicated by the reference to 
Southern Babylonian cities in his obelisk-inscription ; 
for, since the patesis of Lagash and Umma sent their 
relatives or dependants to Manishtusu's court, it may 
be inferred that his dominions included at least a 
portion of Sumer as well as Akkad. Like Urumush, 
he also appears to have undertaken military expedi- 
tions, by means of which he added to the territory 
under his control. In the British IMuseum are frag- 
ments of two monoliths, engraved with duplicate 
inscriptions, which record his defeat of a confederation 
of thirty-two kings "on this side (?) of the sea," and 
the capture of the cities over whicli they ruled. ^ 
It is difficult to determine with certainty the region 
in which these cities lay, but, since " the sea " is 
mentioned without any qualifying phrase, we may pro- 
bably take it as referring to the Persian Gulf. In 
that case the text may have recorded the subjugation 

» Cf. Hroznv, " \Vien. Zeits.," XXI., p. 40. 

2 Nos. 56630 and 66631; cf. Jensen, " Zeite. fiir A.ssyr.," XV., p. 248, 
n. 1. Only a few siij-ns are preserved upon each fragment, but these refer to 
tlie same lines of the inscription, and cnaltlc us to restore the passage as 
follows: "[Of the kings] of cities on this side (?) of the sea thirty-two col- 
lected for battle, and I conquered them, and their cities [I captured]." It 
should be noted that the fragmentary text found at Susa and published by 
Scheil, "Textes Elam.-Se'mit, ' II., pi. 1, No. 2, is also a duplicate of the 


of the soutliern portion of Sumcr, or perhaps the 
conquest of cities within the Ehimite border. Thougli 
JNIanishtusii's name does not occur in the few hues of 
the main inscription preserved upon the. fraoments, 
there is no doubt that the text is his, for upon one 
of them is engraved a dedication in rather larger 
characters, stating that tlie stele of which it formed 
a part was dedicated to Shamash by Manishtusu, 
King of Kish. Since both tlie fragments were found 
at Abu Habba, we may conclude tliat the stelag were 
set up in the great temple at Sippar, and were dedicated 
by Manislitusu to the Sun-god in commemoration of 
his victory. 

Other monuments of IManishtusu's reign that have 
come down to us consist of a number of figures and 
statues of the king which have been discovered at 
Siisa during the French excavations on that site. 
There is no doubt that the majority of these were 
carried to Susa as spoil of v>ar, and were not set up 
in that city by Manishtusu himself, for they bear 
Anzanite inscriptions to that effect. Thus one statue 
is stated to have been brought from Akkad to Susa 
by Shutruk-nakhkhunte,^ and another ^ by the same 
king from " Ishnunuk," incidentally proving that tlie 
state of Ashnunnak, which lay to the east of the 
Tigris, formed part of Manishtusu's dominions.^ But 
a more recently discovered statue of the king bears 
no later Anzanite record, and is inscribed with its 
original dedication to the god Naruti by a high 
official in Manishtusu's service.* It is a remarkable 
monument, for while the figure itself is of alabaster, 
the eyes are formed of white hmestone let into sockets 
and held in place by bitumen ; the black pupils are 
now wanting.^ Though the staring effect of the 

1 "TextesKlam.-Semit," IV., pi. 2, No. 1. 

2 Op. cii., pi. 2, No. 2. 

3 It is probal)le that the stiituette figured in "Textes Elam.-Sbinit.," HI., 
pi. '], and four other unpuhlished statues, wliicli all l)ear the legend of 
JShutruk-nakhkhunte, conf[ueror of Ishnunuk, also represent Manishtusu ; in 
all of them the name of tlie original owner has been liammered out fcf. Scheil, 
" Textes P:iam.-Semit.," IV., p. 3). 

* "Textes Elam.-fSeniit.," IV., pi. 1, pp. 1 ff. 

'' See De Morgan, " ('omptes rendus de TAcademie des Inscriptions et 
Belles-lettres," 1907, pp. 397 ff. 


inlaid eyes is scarcely pleasing, the statue is un- 
doubtedly tlie most interesting example of early 
Semitic sculpture in the round that has yet been 
recovered. Both in this statue and in the more 
famous obelisk, Pere Scheil would see evidence of 
Manishtusu's permanent subjugation of Elam, in sup- 
port of his view that Elam and Babylonia practically 

Fig. 57. 

Alabaster statue of Manislitusu, King of Kish, dedicated by a high official 
to the god Naruti. Found at Susa, 

[See Comptes rendus, 1907, p. 398 f. ; D(Ug. en Perse, M6m. X., pi. 1.] 

formed a single country at this early period.* But 
the text inscribed u])on the obelisk, as we have already 
seen,^ is of a purely local interest, and no object would 
have been gained by storing such a record at Susa, 
even on the hypothesis that Manishtusu had trans- 
ferred his capital thither. It is safer therefore to 

» See Scheil, " Textes Elam.-Se'mit.," I., pp. 2 S., IV., pp. 1 ff. 
' See above, p. 20G f. 


draw no historical conclusions from the provenance 
of the statue and the obelisk, but to class them witli 
the other statues which we know to have been carried 
off as spoil to Elam at a later period. There is 
evidence that INIanishtusu, like Urumush, carried on 
a successful war with Elam/ but it is probable that 
the successes of both kin^^s were of the nature of 
victorious raids and were followed up by no permanent 
occupation of the country. The early existence of 
Semitic influence in Elam is amply attested by the 
employment of the Semitic Babylonian language for 
their own inscriptions by native Elamite rulers such 
as Basha-Shushinak.^ But it does not necessarily 
follow that the inscriptions of native kings of Babylonia, 
which have been found at Susa, were deposited there 
by these kings themselves during a period of Semitic 
rule in Elam. In fact, it was probably not until the 
period of the Dynasty of Ur that Elam was held 
for any length of time as a subject state by kings 
of either Sumer or Akkad. 

Until recently Manishtusu and Urumush were 
the only kings of Kish of this period whose names 
had been recovered. But a find has been made at 
Susa, which, while furnishing the name of another 
king of Kish, raises important questions with regard 
to the connection between the empires of Kish and 
Akkad. In the present chapter we have been dealing 
with a period of transition in the history of the lands 
of Sumer and Akkad. The fall of Lagash had been 
followed by a confederation of Sumerian cities with 
Erech as its capital, and the conquests of Lugal- 
zaggisi had sufficed to preserve for a time the integrity 
of the southern kingdom he had founded. But events 
were already taking place which were to result in 
the definite transference of power from Sumer to the 
north. The votive inscriptions from Nippur have 
thrown some light upon the struggles by which the 
Semitic immigrants into Northern Babylonia sought 
to extend their influence southward. The subsequent 
increase in the power of Kish was not followed by 
any fresh access of Sumerian power, but directly 

» See Chap. VIII., p. 2,31. 2 See Chap. X., p. 289. 


paved the way for the Semitic empire founded by 
Shar-Gani-sharri with the city of Akkad as his capital. 
The evidence of the close connection between the 
rise of Kish and Akkad suggests that both cities were 
borne up upon the same wave of Semitic domination, 
which by this time had succeeded in imposing itself 
on Babylonia from the north. In the following chapter 
we shall see that Shar-Gani-sharri was not the leader 
of this racial movement, and that his empire rested 
upon foundations which other rulers had laid. 



THE name of Sargon of Agade, or Akkad, bulks 
largely in later Babylonian tradition, and his 
reign has been regarded by modern writers as 
marking the most important epoch in the early history 
of liis country. The reference in the text of Nabonidus 
to the age of Naram-Sin has caused the Dynasty of 
^Vkkad to be taken as the canon, or standard, by which 
to measure the relative age of other dynasties or of 
rulers whose inscriptions have from time to time been 
recovered upon various early Babylonian sites. Even 
those historians who have refused to place reliance upon 
the figures of Nabonidus, have not, by so doing, de- 
tracted from the significance of S argon's position in 
history ; and, since tradition associated his name with 
the founding of his empire, the terms " Pre-Sargonic " 
and " Post-Sargonic ' have been very generally em- 
ployed as descriptive of the earlier and later periods in 
the history of Sumer and Akkad. The finding of early 
inscriptions of Shar-Gani-sharri of Akkad, and of tablets 
dated in his reign, removed any tendency to discredit 
the historical value of the later traditions ; and the 
identification of Shar-Gani-sharri with the Sargon of 
the Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian scribes ceased to be 
called in question. In fact, if any one point in early 
Babylonian history was to be regarded as certainly 
established, it was the historical character of Sargon of 
Agade. But a recent discovery at Susa has introduced 
a fresh element into the problem, and has reopened its 
discussion along unfamiliar lines. Before introducing 
the new data, that must be explained and reconciled 
with the old, it will be well to refer briefly to the steps 




by which Saroon's name was recovered and his position 
in history deduced. 

Sargon's name was first met with in certain ex- 
planatory texts of a rehgious or astrological character, 
Avhich had been recovered from Ashur-bani-pal's library 
at Nineveh. Here we find references to the name 
Sharru-ukin,^ or Sargon, king of Agade, from which it 
appeared that he had played an important part in 
Assyrian heroic mytliology.^ In the year 1867, atten- 
tion was first directed to Sargon's place in history when 
Sir Henry Rawlinson briefly announced his disco\'ery 
of the famous Legend of Sargon,^ in which the king 
is represented as recounting in the first person the story 
of his birth and boyhood, his elevation to the throne and 
his subsequent empire. The text of the Legend was 
published in 1870,^ and two years later it was translated 
by George Smith, who added a translation of the 
Omens of Sargon and Naram-Sin, which he had just 
come across in the collections of tablets from Kuyunjik.^ 
Smith followed Rawlinson in ascribing to Sargon the 
building of the temple E-ulmasli in Agade, by restoring 
his name as that of Naram-Sin's father in the broken 
cylinder of Nabonidus found by Taylor at Mukayyar.® 

Up to this time no original text of Shar-Gani-sharri's 
reign was known. The first to be published was the 
beautiful cyHnder-seal of Ibni-sharru, a high official in 
Shar-Gani-sharri's service, of which Menant gave a 

1 Written both as Sfiarru-Gi-NA. and as Sharru-oxj. 

- Cf. "^ Cuneiform Inscriptions from Western Asia/' Vol. II. (18G6), 
pi. 39, No. 5, 1. 41j where Sargon's name occurs in conjunction witli liis title 
"King of Agade," or pi. 48, 1. 40, where he is credited with such descriptions 
as "king of justice" (xhar kitti), "proclaimer of justice " {dahib kitti), " pro- 
claimer of favours" (dabih damkdti); the passage in pi. 50, 1. G4, which 
mentions the old Babylonian city of Dur-Sharrukin, "Sargon's Fortress," 
was also referred to him. 

^ Rawlinson announced his discovery of the Legend of Sargon in the 
AthencBum, No. 2080, Sept. 7, 1867, p. 305, where he made the acute 
suggestion that Sargon of Assyria, the father of Sennacherib, may have been 
called "the later Sargon" {Sharru-ukin arku) "to distinguish him from tlie 
hero of romance whose adventures were better known among the Assyrian 

* "Cun. Inscr. West. Asia," Vol. III. (1870), pi. 4, No. YII. 

6 "Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," Vol. I. (1872), p. 46 f. 

6 See " Cun. Inscr. West. Asia," Vol. I. (1861), pi. 69, Col. II., 11. 29-32 ; 
Oppert had restored the name of Naram-Sin's father as Sagaraktiyas (cf. 
" Expe'dition scientifique en Mdsopotamie, " Vol. I. (1863), p. 273, and 
" Histoire des Empires de Chalde'e et d'Assyrie" (1865), pp 22 ff.). 


description in 1877/ and again in 1883.^ M(^nant read 
tlie king's name as " Shegani-shar-lukh," and he did not 
identify him with Sargon the elder (whom he put in 
the nineteenth century B.C.), but suggested that he was 
a still earlier king of Akkad. In 1882 an account was 
published of the Abu Habba cylinder of Nabonidus, 
which records his restoration of E-babbar and contains 
the passage concerning the date of Narjlm-Sin, " the son 
of Sargon." ^ In the following year the British Museum 
acquired the famous mace-head of Shar-Gani-sharri, 
which had been dedicated by him to Shamash in his 
great temple at Sippar ; this was the first actual inscrip- 
tion of Shar-Gani-sharri to be found. In place of 
Menant's reading " Shegani-shar-lukh," the name was 
read as " Shargani," the two final syllables being cut off 
from it and treated as a title, and, in spite of some 
dissentients, the identity of Shargani of Agade with 
Sargon the elder was assumed as certain.* Unlike 
Sargon, the historical character of Naram-Sin presented 
no difficulties. His name had been read upon the vase 
discovered by M. Fresnel at Babylon and afterwards 
lost in the Tigris ; ^ and, although he was there called 
simply "king of the four quarters," his identification 
with the Naram-Sin mentioned by Nabonidus on his 
cylinder from Ur was unquestioned. Further proof of 
the correctness of the identification was seen in the 
occurrence of the name of Magan upon the vase, when 
it was discovered that the second section of his Omens 
recorded his conquest of that country.^ 

^ See '^Comptes rendus de rAcaddmie des Inscriptions et Belles-lettres/' 
Ser. IV., Tome V. (Oct., 1877), pp. 330 ff. An impression of the seal had been 
sent from Bajiflidad to Constantinople, whence M. Mt^nant had received it 
from M. Barre de Laucy in 1865. It was later acfjuired by M, de Clercq 
(cf. " Collection de Clercq," Tome I., 1888, No. 46, pi. V., p. 49 f.). 

2 " Recherches sur la glyptique orientals," I. (1883), p. 73 f. 

» See Pinches, " Proc. .Soc. Bibl. Arch.," Vol. V. (Nov. 7, 1882), 
pp. 8f., 12. For a discussion of the date, see above, Chap. III., p. 00 f. 

■• See Pinches, op. cit., Vol. VI. (Nov. 6, 1883), pp. 11 ff. 'i'iie identifica- 
tion was opposed by Mdnant, who pointed out that the two final syllables of 
the name could not l)e treated as a title {op. cit., Feb. 6, 1884, pp. 88 ff., and 
"Collection de Clercq," p. 49 f.). Meiiant adhered to his former opinion 
that Shargani-shar-lukh (as he now read the name) was an earlier king of 

" SeeOppert, "Expedition scientifique," II. (1859), p. 02, and "Cun, 
Inscr. West. Asia," Vol. I., pi. 3, No. VII. 

6 See George Smith, "Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," Vol. I., p. 52. 




Brit. Mus.. Xo. oi r4b: pkoto. hy Mcssis. Man sell b' Co. 


%|i'? *"v' 

/>';•//. Mus., Xos. Oioi^ and 2i44=;. 


Apart from tlie difficulty presented by Sargon's 
name, the absence of early records concerning the reign 
of Shar-Gani-sharri for a time led in certain quarters to 
a complete underrating of the historical value of the 
traditions preserved in the Omen-text. The mace-head 
from Abu Habba alone survived in proof of the latter's 
existence, and it was easy to see in the later Babylonian 
traditions concernmg Sargon valueless tales and legends 
of which the historian could make no use.^ The dis- 
covery at Nippiu', close to the south-east wall of the 
ziggurat, or temple-tower, of brick-stamps and door- 
sockets bearing the name of Shar-Gani-sharri and re- 
cording his building of the temple of Enlil,^ proved that 
he had exercised authority over at least a considerable 
part of Babylonia. At a later period of the American 
excavations there was found in the structure of the 
ziggurat, below the crude brick platform of Ur-Engur, 
another pavement consisting of two courses of burned 
bricks, most of them stamped with the known inscription 
of Shar-Gani-sharri, while the rest bore the briefer in- 
scription of Xaram-Sin. The pavement had apparently 
been laid by Sargon and partly re-laid by Naram-Sin, 
who had utilized some of the former's building materials. 
The fact that both kings used the same peculiar bricks, 
which were found in their original positions in the 
structure of the same pavement, was employed as an 
additional argument in favour of identifying Shar-Gani- 
sharri with Sargon 1., "the father of Naram-Sin."^ 

A further stage in the development of the subject 
was reached on the recovery at Tello of a large number 
of tablets inscribed with accounts of a commercial and 
agricultural character, some of which were dated by 
events in the reigns of Shar-Gani-sharri and Narfim-Sin. 
This was at once hailed as confirming and completing 
the disputed traditions of the Omen-tablet,* and from 

> Cf. Winckler, " Geschichte Babyloniens und Assyriens " (1892), pp. ?>0, 
39, and " Altoriciitalische J'orschungeii/' I., p. 238 (1895); and Niebuhr, 
" Chronologie " (1896), p. 75. 

2 Ililprecht, "Old Bab. Inscr.," I. (1893), pll. 1-3, p. 15. 

"" Op. cit., 11.(1896), p. 19 f. 

* Cf. Thureau-Dauj^iii, "Comptes rendus de I'Acadt'niie des Inscriptions et 
Belles-lettres," Ser. IV., Tome XXIV., 1896, pp. 355 ff. ; and Ileuzey, 
" Revue d'Assyr.,'" IV. (1897), p. 2. 


thiit time the identity of Sargon and Shar-Gani-sharri 
was not seriously called in question. Finally, the recent 
discovery of a copy of the orignial chronicle, from which 
the historical references in the Omen-tablet were taken, 
restored the traditions to their true settinii^ and ireed 
tliem from tlie augural text into which they had been 
incorporated/ The dilTcrence in the forms of the two 
names was ignored or explained away," and the early 
texts were combined with tlie late Babylonian traditions. 
Both sources of information were regarded as referring 
to the same monarch, who was usually known by the 
title of Sargon I., or Sargon of Agade. 

The discovery wliich has reopened the question as 
to the identity of Shar-Gani-sharri with the Sargon 
of later tradition was made at Susa in the course of 
excavations carried out on that site by the Delegation 
en Pei'se. The new data are furnished by a monu- 
ment, which, to judge from the published descriptions 
of it,^ may probably be regarded as one of the most 
valuable specimens of early Babylonian sculpture that 
has yet been found. Two portions of the stone have 
been recovered, engraved with sculptures and bearing 
traces of an inscription of an early Semitic king of 
Babylonia. The stone is roughly triangular in shape, 
the longest side being curved, and on all three sides 
reliefs are sculptured in two registers. In the upper 
register are battle scenes and a row of captives, and 
in the lower are representations of the king and his 
suite. On the third face of the monolith, to the right 
of the king in the lower register, is a scene in which 
vultures are represented feeding on the slain ; and on 
a smaller detached fragment of the stone is a figure, 
probably that of a god, clubbing the king's enemies 
who are caught in a net. The details of the net and 
the vultures obviously recall the similar scenes on the 

' See King, "Chronicles concerning early Babylonian Kings" (1907), 
Vol. I., pp. 27 11". 

^ Sliargani, the first part of tlie name Sliar-Gani-sliarri, was equated with 
Shnrru-c,i-SA{= tilchi), and tlie .second part of the name, read as shar-ali, 
" kiiif^ of the city,'' was rej^arded as having been dropped by a process of 

^ Sec Gautier, "Recueil de travaux," Vol. XX\1I., pp. 176 ff., and Scheil, 
"Te-vtes Elam.-S^mit.," IV., pp. 4 ff. 


stele of Eiinnatum/ but tlie treatment of tlie birds 
and also of the figures in the battle scenes, is said to 
be far more varied and less conventional than in 
Eannatum's sculpture. That they are Semitic and 
not Sumerian work is pro\ed by the Semitic inscrip- 
tion, of which a few phrases of the closing imprecations 
are still visible. 'J'he king also has the long pointed 
beard of the Semites, descending to his girdle, and, 
although his clothing has Sumerian characteristics, he 
is of the Semitic type. Several points of interest are 
suggested by details of the sculpture, and to these we 
will presently refer. 

The point which now concerns us is the name of 
the king to whom we owe this remarkable monument. 
Although the main inscription has unfortunately been 
hammered out, the king's name has been preserved 
in a cartouche in front of him, where he is termed 
" Sharru-Gi, the king." Now Sharru-Gi is practically 
identical with Sharru-Gi-NA, one of the two forms imder 
whicli Sargon's name is written in Assyrian and Neo- 
Babylonian texts ^ ; for the sign xa in the latter name 
is merely a phonetic complement to the ideogram and 
could be dropped in writing without affecting in any 
way the pronunciation of the name. Hitherto, as we 
have seen, Sargon, the traditional father of Naram-Sin, 
has been identified with Shar-Gani-sharri of Akkad. 
The question obviously suggests itself: Can we identify 
the Sharru-Gi of the new monument with Shar-Gani- 
sharri ? Can we suppose that a contemporary scribe 
invented this rendering of Shar-Gani-sharri's name, and 
thus gave rise to the form which we find preserved in 
later Babylonian and Assyrian tradition? Pere Scheil, 
who was the first to offer a solution of the problem, 
is clearly right in treating Sharru-Gi and Shar-Gani- 
sharri as different personages ; the forms are too dis- 
similar to be regarded as variants of the same name. 
It has also been noted that Sharru-Gi and Naram-Sin 
are both mentioned on a tablet from Tello. On these 
grounds Pere Scheil suggested that Sharru-Gi, whose 
name he would render as Sharru-ukin ( = Sargon), was 
the father of Naram-Sin, as represented in the late 

1 See above, Chap. V., pp. 125, 130 ff. ^ gge above, p. 217, n. 1. 


tradition ; Shnr-Gani-shjirri he would regard as another 
sovereign of Akkad, of the same dynasty as Sargon and 
Naram-Sin and one of their successors on the throne.^ 

It may be admitted that this explanation is one 
that at first sight seems to commend itself, for it 
appears to succeed in reconciling the later tradition 
with the early mommients. But difficulties in the 
way of its acceptance were at once pointed out.^ The 
occurrence of the proper name Sharru-Gi-ili, " Sharru- 
Gi is my god," on the Obelisk of INIanishtusu clearly 
proves that a king bearing the name of Sharru-Gi, and 
presumably identical with the Sharru-Gi of the new 
stele, preceded Manishtusu, king of Kish, for the deifi- 
cation of a king could obviously only take place during 
his lifetime or after his death.^ Similar evidence has 
already been cited to prove that Urumush of Kisli was 
anterior to Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin, though 
his reign may not have been separated from theirs by 
any long interval.* Granting these conclusions, if 
Naram-Sin had been the son of Sharru-Gi, as suggested 
by Pere Scheil, Urumush would have been separated 
from Manishtusu by the Dynasty of Akkad, a com- 
bination that is scarcely probable. Moreover, the 
context of the passage on the tablet from Tello, on 
which the names of Sharru-Gi and Naram-Sin are 
mentioned, though of doubtful interpretation, does not 
necessarily imply tiiat they were living at the same 
time ; they may have been separated by several genera- 
tions. These reasons in themselves make it probable 
that Sharru-Gi was not the founder of Naram-Sin's 
dynasty, but was a predecessor of Manishtusu and 
Urumush upon the throne of Kish. 

It has been further pointed out that in an inscrip- 
tion preserved in the Imperial Ottoman Museum at 
Constantinople the name of a king of Kish is men- 
tioned, whicli, to judge from the traces still visible, 
may probably be restored as that of Sliarru-c;i.'' The 

1 See Scheil, "'I'extes Elam.-Scmit," IV., pp. 4 ff. 

2 See Thurcau Daiiffin, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," ]!t08, col. 313 ff. ; cf. also 
King, " Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," Vol. XXX. (1908), pp. 239 ff. 

3 See above, p. 203. * See above, p. 203 f. 

^ See King, op. rit., p. 240 f. M. 'rimreau-Dangin has since examined the 
text at Constantinople^ and he confirms the restoration. 


fragmentary nature of the text, which was found at 
Abu Habba during the excavations conducted by the 
Turkish Government upon that site/ rendered any 
deductions that might be drawn from it uncertain ; 
but it sufficed to corroborate the suggestion that Sharru- 
Gi was not a king of -^jVkkad, but a still earlier king 
of Ivish. Since then I have recognized a duplicate 
text of the Constantinople inscription, also from Abu 
Habba, which enables us to supplement and to some 
extent correct the conclusions based upon it. The 
duphcate consists of a cruciform stone object, inscribed 
on its twelve sides with a votive text recording a series 
of gifts to the Sun-god Shamash and his consort Aa 
in the city of Sippar, and the early part of its text 
corresponds to the fragmentary inscription at Constanti- 
nople. Unfortunately the beginning of the text is 
wanting, as is the case with the Constantinople text, 
so that we cannot decide with certainty the name of 
the king who had the monument engraved. But the 
duphcate furnishes fresh data on which to base a 

^Vlthough the king's name is wanting, it is possible 
to estimate the amount of text that is missing at the 
head of the first column, and it is now clear that the 
name of Sharru-Gi does not occur at the beginning of 
the inscription, but some lines down the column ; in 
other words, its position suggests a name in a genealogy 
rather than that of the writer of the text. Moreover, 
in a broken passage in the second column the name 
Sharru-Gi occurs again, and the context proves definitely 
that he was not the writer of the text, who speaks in 
the first person, tliougli he may not improbably have 
been his father. 15ut, although the monument can no 
longer be ascribed to Sharru-Gi, the titles " the mighty 
king, the king of Kish," which occur in the first column 
of the text, are still to be taken as applying to him, 
while the occurrence of the name in the second column 
confirms its suggested restoration in the genealogy. 
It may therefore be regarded as certain that Sharru-Gi 
was an early king of Kish, and, it would seem, the 
father of the king who had the cruciform monument 

^ Cf. Scheil, " Une saisou de fouilles a Sippar,'' p. 96. 


inscribed and deposited as a votive offering in tlie 
temple of Shamash at Sippar. In the last chapter 
reference has been made to Manishtusn's activity in 
Sippar and his devotion to the great temjile of the 
Sun-god in that city.^ For various epigraphical reasons, 
based on a careful study of its text, I would provision- 
ally assign the cruciform monument to Manishtusu. 
Accordinix to this theory, Sharru-Gi would be Manish- 
tusu's fatlier, and the earliest king of Kish of this period 
whose name has yet been recovered. 

The proof that Sharru-Gi. or, according to the later 
interpretation of the name. Sargon, was not identical 
with Sliar-Gani-sharri, King of Akkad, nor was even a 
member of his dynasty, would seem to bring once more 
into discredit the later traditions which gathered round 
his name. To the Assyrian and Xeo-Babylonian scribes 
Sargon appears as a king of Agade, or Akkad. and the 
father of Xaram-Sin, who succeeded him upon his 
throne. It is clear, therefore, that the name of the earlier 
kingf of Kish has been borrowed for the kino^ of Akkad. 
whose real name, Shar-Gani-sharri, has disappeared 
in the tradition. Are we to imagine that the great 
achievements, which later ages ascribed to Sargon of 
Akkad. were also borrowed along with his name from 
the historical Sargon of Kish ? Or is it possible that the 
traditional Sargon is representative of his period, and 
combines in his one person the attributes of more than 
one kinsf ? In the cruciform monument, which we 
have seen may probably be assigned to ]Manislitusu, 
the king prefaces the account of his conquest of Anshan 
by stating that it took place at a time " when all the 
lands . . . revolted against me." and the plirase employed 
recalls the similar expression in the Xeo-Babylonian 
chronicle, which states that in Sargon's old age " all the 
lands revolted against him." The paralleUsm in the 
language of tlie early text and the late chronicle might 
perhaps be cited in support of the view that facts as 
well as names had been confused in tlie later tradition. 

Fortunately we have not to decide the question as a 
point of hterary criticism, nor even upon grounds of 
general probability, for we have the means of testing 

' See above, pp. 2iJti, 212 





Brit. Mtis.. Xo. Qlonl. 


the traditions in detail by comparison with contem- 
porary documents. Reference has already been made 
to tablets dated in the reigns of Shar-Gani-sliarri and 
Naram-Sin, and the date-formuLe occurring upon 
them refer, in accordance with the custom of the 
period, to events of public interest after which the 
years were named. In the case of tablets dated in Shar- 
Gani-sharri's reign, we find three date-formulag which 
have a direct bearing upon the point at issue, and refer 
to incidents which correspond in a remarkable degree to 
achievements ascribed to Sargon in the Omen-tablet 
and the Neo- Babylonian Chronicle. The conquest of 
Amurru, the " Western Land " on the coast of Syria, 
is referred to in four sections of the Omens,^ probably 
representing separate expeditions thither. The third 
section records a decisive victory for Sargon, and 
apparently the deportation of the king of Amurru to 
Akkad ; while in the fourth Sargon is recorded to have 
set up his images in Amurru, that is to say, he carved 
his image upon the rocks near the Mediterranean coast, 
or in the Lebanon, as a lasting memorial of his conquest 
of the country. Now one of the tablets of accounts 
from Tello is dated " in the year in which Shar-Gani- 
sharri conquered Amm-ru in Basar."^ It is therefore 
certain that the conquest of Amurru, ascribed by 
tradition to Sargon of Akkad, is to be referred to Shar- 
Gani-sharri and treated as historically true. 

We obtain a very similar result when we employ the 
same method of testing Sargon's Elamite campaigns. 
The Omen-tablet opens with the record of Sargon's 
invasion of the country, followed by his conquest of the 
Elamites, whom he is related to have afflicted grievously 
by cutting off their food supplies.^ This would appear 
to have been in the nature of a successful raid into 
Elamite territory. On the other hand, one of the early 
account-tablets is dated in the year when Shar-Gani- 
sharri overcame the expedition which Elam and Zakhara 

' Kiug, "Chronicles," \'ol. II., pp. 27 ff.. Sections II, IV., V., and VII. _^ 

2 Thureau-Dangin, " Comptes rendus de TAcademie des Inscriptions." 
1890, p. 358, No. 2 and n. 1, " Recueil de tablettes chaldeenues/' p. 57, 
No. 124 (cf. p. 4G, No. 85) ; see also " Konigsinschriften," p. 225. 

3 " Chronicles," Vol. II., p. L'S f., Section I. 



had sent agjiinst Opis and Sakli.' It is clear that the 
date, although it records a success against the Elamites, 
can hardly refer to the same event as the Omen-text, 
since the latter records an invasion of Elam by Sargon, 
not a raid into 15abylonian territory by the Elamites. 
But the contemporary docum.ent at least proves that 
Sliar-Gani-sharri was successful in his war with Elam, 
and it is not unlikely that the attack on Opis by the 
Elamites provoked his invasion of their country.^ Such 
a raid as the Omens describe fully accords with the 
practice of this period, when the kings of Kish and 
Akkad used to invade Elam and return to their own 
country laden with spoil.^ The date-formula which 
confirms a third point in the late tradition refers to the 
year in which Shar-Gani-sharri laid the foundations of 
the temple of Anunitu and the temple of Amal in 
Babylon,* proving not only that the city of Babylon was 
in existence at this period, but also that Sargon devoted 
himself to its adornment by building temples there. 
The late Chronicle records that Sargon removed the 
soil from the trenches of Babylon,^ and a broken passage 
in the Omens appears to state that he increased the 
might of Babylon.** On this point the early date- 
formula and the late tradition confirm and supplement 
each otlier. 

Thus, wherever we can test the achievements 
ascribed to Sargon of Akkad by comparison with 
contemporary records of Shar-Gani-sharri's reign, we 
find a complete agreement between them. Another 
feature in the traditional picture of Sargon admirably 
suits the founder of a dynasty at Akkad, whereas it 
would have little suitability to a king of Kish. This is 
the support which the goddess Islitar is stated to have 

' "Comptes rendus," 189C, p. 367, No. 1 ; " llecueil de tablettes," p. 60, 
No. 130. 

2 'i'lie warlike expedition to Dor (Dur-ilu), which is referred to iu the 
Legend of Sargon (.see "Cliroiiiclcs," Vol. TI., p. 92), may possibly be 
connected with this campaign of Shar-tiani-sliarri. 

3 See above, p. 205, and below, pp. 231, 243 f. 

* "Comptes rendus," 189G, p. 359, No. fi ; " Kecueil de tablettes," p. 56, 
No. IIB. 

6 "Chronicles," 11., p. 8, 1. 18. 

^ Of), cif., II., p. 27. The passage has no reference to Kish, as suggested 
by Hilprecht, "Old Bab. luscr.," II., p. 26. 


given Surgon, both in raising him to tlie throne and in 
guichng his arms to victory.' For ^Vkkad, which Sliar- 
Gani-sharri made his capital, was an important seat of 
her worship. \N'hen, therefore, the kite tradition 
records that Sargon conquered Subartu and Kazalhi, 
Ave may ascribe these Aictories to Sliar-Gani-sharri, 
although they are unrecorded in the contemporary 
monmnents that have as yet been recovered. At any 
time it may happen that tlie name of Kashtubila of 
Kazallu may be found in a text of Shar-Gani-sharri's 
reign, as that of Mannu-dannu of Magan has been 
recovered on a statue of Naram-Sin.^ Such an attitude 
of expectancy is justified by the striking instances in 
which the late tradition has already been confirmed by 
the early texts ; and the parallelism in the language of 
Manishtusu's monument and the late Chronicle of 
Sargon, to which reference has been made, must be 
treated as fortuitous. Having regard to the insecure 
foundations upon which these early empires were based, 
Shar-Gani-sharri, like Manishtusu, may well have had 
to face a revolt of the confederation of cities he had 
subjected to his rule. In such a case the scribe of 
Shar-Gani-sharri would probably have employed phrase- 
ology precisely similar to that in Manishtusu's text, 
for conventional forms of expression constantly recur in 
monumental inscriptions of the same period. 

Our conclusion, therefore, is that in the later texts 
Shar-Gani-sharri has adopted Sharru-Gi's name, but 
nothing more. In view of the general accuracy of the 
late traditions concerning the conquests of these early 
rulers, it may seem strange that such a change of names 
should have taken place ; but it is not difficult to 
suggest causes for the confusion. Both kings were 
great conquerors, both belonged to the same epoch, and 
founded dynasties in Northern Babylonia,^ and both bore 
names which, in part, are not dissimilar. Moreover, the 

1 " Chronicles," II., pp. 3, 30 f., 90 f. 

2 See below, p. 241. 

3 Thouffh we have no direct evidence in his case, Sharru-Gi may well have 
been the founder of his dynasty ; the absence of his father's name from the 
genealogy in the Constantinople text and the cruciform monument accords 
with this suggestion. Shar-Gani-sharri ascribes no title to his father Dati- 
Enlil (see further, p. 232). 


suggestion has been made that the words " Gani " and 
" Gi," which form components of the names, may 
possibly have both been divine titles,' though we find 
no trace of them in the later periods of history. But 
whether this was so or not, and whatever renderings of 
the names we adopt,^ it is clear that Sargon's traditional 
achievements may be credited to Shar-Gani-Sharri, who, 
as king of Agade or Akkad, succeeded to tlie earlier 
empire of the kings of Kish.^ 

We liave already seen reason to believe that the 
kings of Kish were separated by no long interval from 
the empire of Akkad,* and this view is supported, not 
only by a study of their inscriptions, but also by the 
close connection that may be traced between the artistic 
achievements of the two periods. Epigraphic evidence 
has been strikingly reinforced by the discovery of Sharru- 
Gi's monolith ; for the sculptures upon it share to some 
extent the high artistic qualities which have hitherto 
been regarded as the exclusive possession of the Dynasty 
of Akkad. The modelling of the figures on Naram- 
Sin's stele of victory,^ their natural pose and spirited 
attitudes, have long been recognized as belonging to a 
totally different category from the squat and conventional 
representations upon the Stele of the Vultures. The 
cylinder-seals of the period are marked by the same 

1 Cf. Scheil, "TextcsElam-Semit.," I., pp. 16, 2G. 

2 Dhorme's suggestion that r,i was an ideographic writing for Gani in the 
early period (cf. "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1909, col. 63 f.) is scarcely probable, 
though the fact that the commonest ideographic value for gi was kanu or 
ganu ("a reed") may possibly have contributed in some way to the later 
confusion. It should also be noted that Clay has recently pointed out the 
occurrence of the name IShn-ru-hi-iii, on a fragment of an early text (see 
"Amurru," p. 194), as apparently that of a ruler of ''the four quarters." 
Since the final n can hardly be treated as the nunnation (as in the word 
ir-hi-ti-in in the fifth line of tlie text), we may probably regard the passage as 
proving the early existence of the name Shurrukin, Sargon, which would be 
the natural rendering of the name Sharru-ci (see above, p. 221). But the 
title of the king in the new text, and his description as " the beloved of 
Ishtar," would suit a king of Akkad rather tlian a king of Kish, thus 
affording additional excuse for a confusion by tlie later scribes. 

2 It is therefore still permissible to employ the name "Sargon" as a 
synonym of Shar-Gani-sharri, the predecessor of Naram-Sin upon the throne 
of Akkad. Similarly the terms " Pre-Sargonic " and " Post-Sargonic " need 
not be given up. In the text, however, the forms Sharru-Gi and Shar-Gaui- 
sharri have been employed for the sake of clearness. 

* See above, p. 210'f. 

'" See the frontispiece ; and cf. p. 242 f. 



degree of excellence, but between the sculptures of 
Eannatum and those of Narani-Sin there has hitherto 
been a gap in the orderly stages of development. A 
single example of engraved metal-work had indeed 
been recovered, but the date of this was, and still is, to 
some extent uncertain. The object consists 
of the copper head of a colossal votive lance, 
some thirty-one and a half inches long. On 
one of its faces is engraved in spirited outline 
the figure of a lion rampant, and on the neck 
of the blade is the name of a king of Kish 
beginninof with the sign " Sharru." A slight 
indication of date is afforded by the fact 
that it was found at Tello, near the eastern 
corner of Ur-Nina's building, but at a rather 
higher level.^ If the second line of the in- 
scription, which is illegible through oxidiza- 
tion, contained a title and not part of the 
name, it is probable that we may restore the 
name in the first line as that of Sharru-Gi 
himself. Otherwise we must assign the lance 
to some other king of Kish, but whether we 
should place him before or after Sharru-Gi 
it is difficult to say. 

It was clear that the art of the later 
period was ultimately based upon the formal 
though decorative conventions of the earlier 
Sumerian time, but, with the doubtful ex- 
ception of the copper lance-head and the 
rude statues of Manishtusu, no example had 
previously been found of the intermediate trtieoTaiTcrrip 
period. The missing link between the earlier ^^s of, Kish. 

1 f -. i>iiiji rrom iello. 

sculpture oi Lagash and tiiat oi ^Vkkad has ^^^^ ^^ 5 ^^^^ 
now been supplied by the monolith of Sharru- No. 1.] 
Gi. Its points of resemblance to the Vulture 
Stele, both in design and treatment, prove direct con- 
tinuity with early Sumerian art. The divine net and 
the vultures were obviously borrowed from the Tello 
monument, while the guards attending upon Sharru- 
Gi display the squat and heavy appearance which 

Fig. 58. 

Copper head 
of a colossal 
votive lance . 
engraved with 
the name and 

> See Heuzey, " Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. IV., p. 111. 


characterizes the warriors of Eannatum. At the same 
time, a new element is introduced in the battle scenes, 
where the designs and grouping are more varied and less 
conventional. Here the sculptor has allowed his fancy 
freer play, and has attempted a naturalistic treatment 
in his delineation of the combatants. He has not fully 
attained the masterly qualities which characterize the 
stele of Xaram-Sin, but his work is its direct forerunner. 
To judge from the striking evidence furnished by a 
single monument, the art of Kish must have been 
closely related to that of ^Vkkad. The latter inaugu- 
rated no totally new departure, but was dependent on 
its ])redecessor, whose most striking qualities it adopted 
and improved. 

As in the sphere of art, so, too, in that of politics 
and government, the Dynasty of Akkad did not 
originate, but merely expanded and de\'eloped its 
inheritance along lines already laid down. Even with 
Sharru-Gi, it is clear that we have not reached the 
beginning of the Semitic movement in Northern 
Babylonia, and that in this respect the kingdom of 
Kish resembled the later empire of Akkad. The battle 
scenes upon his monuments prove that Sharru-Gi was 
a great conqueror, but the traces of the text supply no 
details of his campaigns. It is significant, however, 
that his enemies are bearded Semites, not Sumerians, 
proving that the Semitic immigration into Northern 
Babylonia and the surrounding districts was no new 
thing ; we may infer that kindred tribes had long been 
settled in this portion of Western Asia, and were 
prepared to defend their territory from the encroach- 
ments of one of their own race. Yet details of Sharru- 
Gi's sculpture prove that with him we are appreciably 
nearer to the time of Sumerian domination in the 
north. The shaven faces of the king's suite or body- 
guard suggest Sumerians, and their clothing, which the 
king himself shares, is also of that type. In such 
details we may see evidence of strong Simierian 
influence, either in actual life or in artistic convention. 
Such a mixture of Sumerian and Semitic characteristics 
would be quite foreign to the Dynasty of Akkad, 
and it is probable that the earlier rulers of Kish 


had not yet proved themselves superior to Suinerian 

Some account has already been given in tlie last 
chapter of the campaigns of Manishtusu and Urumush, 
which paved the way for the conciuests of Siiar-Gani- 
sharri. AVe there saw that Manislitusu claims to have 
defeated a confederation of thirty-two cities,^ and, if we 
are right in assigning the cruciform monument to him, 
we have definite proof that his successes were not con- 
fined to Akkad and Sumer, but were carried beyond 
the Elamite border. Since the fragments of his stelae, 
like the cruciform monument itself, were found at 
Sippar, where they had beer, dedicated in the great 
temple of the Sun-god, it is quite possible that they 
should be employed to supplement each other as having 
commemorated the same campaign. In that case, the 
kings of the thirty-two cities are to be regarded as 
havinof inanuurated " the revolt of all the lands," which 
the cruciform monument tells us preceded the conquest 
of Anshan. The leader of the revolt was clearly the 
king of Anshan, since the cruciform monument and its 
duplicate particularly record his defeat and dej)ortation. 
On his return from the campaign, laden with gifts and 
tribute, JNIanislitusu led the king as his captive into 
the presence of Shamash, whose temple he lavishly 
enriched in gratitude for his victory. His boast that he 
ruled, as well as conquered, Anshan was probab'y based 
on the exaction of tribute ; the necessity for the recon- 
quest of Elam by Urumush, and later on by Shar-Gani- 
sharri would seem to indicate that the authority of these 
early Semitic kings in Elam was acknowledged only so 
long as their army was in occupation of the country." 

Already, in the reign of Manishtusu, Akkad and 
her citizens had enjoyed a position of great influence in 

» See above, p. 211 f. 

2 It should he noted that on a tablet from Telle of the time of the Dynasty 
of Akkad mention is made of a patesi of Sasa who must have been the depen- 
dent of the reigning king-. His name should probably be read as Ilishma, but 
as the end of the line is broken, it is also possible that tlie personage referred 
to was Ilish, an official in the service of the patesi of Susa (of. " llec. de 
tabl./' p. 57, No. 122, Rev., 1. 2 f.). It is possible that to this period also 
should be assigned a patesi, whose name, occurring upon the fragment of an 
archaic inscription from Susa, has been provisionally read as Ur-ilira (^ee 
Scheil, " Textes Elam.-Se'mit., III., p. 1) ; see further, p. 243 f. 


the kingdom of Kisli, and it is not surprising tliat in the 
course of a few generations she should have obtained 
the hegemony in Babylonia. We do not know the 
immediate cause of the change of capital, nor whether 
it was the result of a prolonged period of antagonism 
between the rival cities. On this point the later tradi- 
tion is silent, merely recording that Sargon obtained 
" the kingdom " through Ishtar's help. That Shar- 
Gani-sharri was the actual founder of his dynasty is 
clear from the inscription upon his gate-sockets found 
at Nippur, which ascribe no title to his father, Dfiti- 
Enlil,^ pro\'ing that his family had not even held the 
patesiate or governorship of Akkad under the suzerainty 
of Kish. Indeed, tradition related that Sargon's native 
city was Azupirilnu, and it loved to contrast his humble 
birth and upl^ringing with the subsequent splendour of 
his reign. The legend of his committal to the river in 
an ark of bulrushes, and of his rescue and adoption by 
^Vkki, the gardener, would make its appeal to every 
later generation, and it undoubtedly ensured for Sargon 
the position of a national hero in the minds of the 
people. The association of the story with his name, 
while tending to preserve his memory, need not be held 
to discredit the traditions of his conquests, which, as 
we have already seen, are confirmed in several important 
details by the inscriptions of his reign. 

On the transference of power from Kish to Akkad 
an expansion of Semitic authority from Northern 
Babylonia appears to have taken place throughout a 
considerable portion of Western xVsia. Elam no longer 
claims the principal share of attention from the rulers 
of Akkad and Sumer, and Shar-Gani-sharri seems to 
have devoted his energies to extending his influence 
northwards and, more particularly, in the west. Kutu, 
which lay to the north-east of Akkad, in the hilly 
country on the east of the I^ower Zab, was conquered 
in the same year that Shar-Gani-sharri laid the founda- 
tions of the temples of Anunitu and Amal in Babylon, 
and Sharlak, its king, was taken captive.'^ The reference 

» Cf. " Old Bal). Inscr.," Pt. IT., pi. 2, Ao. 2 ; and see furflier, p. 248 f. 
2 See Thuroau-Dangiii, " ("oniptes rcndiis," 189(5, p. .'55'.), ^'o. G ; " Kecueil 
de tablettes," p. 56, No. 118 ; and " Konig.sin.'^chriflen," p. 225. 


to this event in the official title of the year during 
which it took place is some indication of the im- 
portance ascribed to the campaign. Unfortunately, 
we possess no classified date-list for the Dynasty of 
Akkad, such as we have recovered for tlie later 
Dynasties of Ur and Babylon, and the dated tablets of 
this period are too few to enable us to attempt any 
chronological classification of them by their contents. 
We are thus without the means of arranging Sliar- 
Gani-sharri's conquests in the order in which they took 
place, or of tracing the steps by which he gradually 
increased his empire. But if the order of the sections 
on the Omen-tablet has any significance, it would seem 
that his most important conquest, that of Amurru or 
*' the Western Land," took place in the earlier years 
of his reign. 

A discrepancy occurs in the later accounts of this 
conquest, which have come down to us upon the Omen- 
tablet and the Neo-Babylonian Chronicle. While in 
the former the complete subjugation of Amurru is 
recorded to have taken place " in the third year," the 
latter states that this event occurred " in the eleventh 
year." It is quite possible to reconcile the two tradi- 
tions ; the former statement may imply that it took 
three years to subdue the country, the latter that the 
conquest was achieved in the eleventh year of Shar- 
Gani-sharri's reign.^ Indeed, the fact that four sections 
of the Omens refer to Amurru would seem to imply 
that it required several expeditions to bring the whole 
region into complete subjection. By the extension of 
his authority to the Mediterranean coast Shar-Gani- 
sharri made a striking advance upon the ideals of empire 
possessed by his predecessors on the throne of Kish. 
But even in this achievement he was only following in 
the steps of a still earlier ruler. A passage in Lugal- 
zaggisi's text would seem to imply that, in the course of 
an expedition along the Euphrates, he had succeeded 
in penetrating to the Syrian coast.^ But Shar-Gani- 
sharri's conquest appears to have been of a more perma- 
nent character than Lugal-zaggisi's raid. The position 
of his capital rendered it easier to maintain permanent 

1 See King, " Chronicles," Vol. I., p. 38 f '^ See above, p. iU? f. 


relations witli the A\''est, and to despatch punitive 
expeditions tliither in the event of his authority being 
called in question. 

It has been claimed on behalf of Shar-Gani-sharri 
that he did not stop at the coast, but crossed the 
Mediterranean to Cyprus, whicli he is said to have in- 
cluded witliin the limits of his empire. It would seem, 
however, that while the island may have been subject 
indirectly to Babylonian influence at an early period, 
tlicre is no indication of any direct or vigorous 
Semitic influence upon the native Cypriote culture 
at this time.^ But traces of such an influence we should 
expect to find, if the island had been politically subject 
to Shar-Gani-sharri, and had shared the elaborate 
system of commimication which he established 
between the distant parts of his empire. In itself 
the archaeological evidence would scarcely have been 
cited to prove a definite occupation of the island, 
had not a statement occurred upon Sargon's Omen- 
tablet to the effect that " he crossed the Sea of 
tlie West." But the newly discovered chronicle 
proves that the true reading should be " the Sea in 
tlie East," which without doubt indicates the Persian 

From the Chronicle we gather that in the original 
composition this passage was not cast in the form of 
a consecutive narrative. It is a poetical summary of 
Sargon's might, elaborating in greater detail the pre- 
ceding phrase that " he poured out his glory over the 
world." In it the clauses are balanced in antithesis, 
and the Western I^and and tlie Eastern Sea, that is 
Syria and tlie Persian Gulf, are mentioned together as 
having formed the extreme limits of Sargon's empire. 
On the Omen-tablet the original text has been cut up 
into sections and a})plicd piecemeal to different augural 
phenomena. In its new setting as a consecutive narra- 
tive of events the mention of the Persian Gulf was 
obviously inconsistent with the conquest of Amurru, 
and hence it was natural for a copyist to amend the 
text to the form in which it has reached us on the 

' For a (lipciission of the arclueological evidence adduced in favour of tho 
theory, see further, Chap. XII., p. 343 f. 


Omen-tablet.* The Omens still retained the reference 
to the despoiling of the Country of the Sea, i.e. the 
littoral of the Persian Gulf, which Shar-Gani-sharri 
doubtless included within the southern border of his 
empire. AVith this record we may connect the tradi- 
tion, reproduced in the Legend of Sargon, that he 
conquered Dilmun, an island in the Persian Gulf, and 
with his maritime enterprise in this region we may 
compare that of Sennacherib at a later date who crossed 
the Gulf in the course of his conquest of Elam. From 
the earliest periods we know that the rivers and canals 
of Babylonia were navigated,' and the Persian Gulf was 
a natural outlet for the trade of the Sumerian cities in 
the south. In organizing a naval expedition for the 
conquest of the coast and the islands, Shar-Gani-sharri 
would have had native ships and sailors at his disposal, 
whose knowledge of the Gulf had been acquired in the 
course of their regular coastal trading. 

In the internal administration of his empire Shar- 
Gani-sharri appears to have inaugurated, or at any rate 
to have organized, a regular system of communication 
between the principal cities and the capital. The re- 
ferences to separate cities, which occur in the con- 
temporary inscriptions of his reign, are not numerous. 
From the texts found at Nippur, we know that he 
rebuilt E-kur, the great temple of Enlil, and many of 
the bricks which formed his temple-platform and that 
of Naram-Sin have been found in place.^ The mace- 
head from Abu Habba * is an indication that, like his 
predecessors on the throne of Kish, he devoted himself 

^ The phrase "the Sea in the East, " opposed to the Country of the West, 
can only mean the Eastern Sea, i.e. the Persian Gulf. It would be more than 
a fanciful interpretation to take it as implyine;' a maritime expedition in the 
eastern portion of the Western Sea, as Winckler suggests (see "Orient. Lit.- 
Zeit./' Nov. 1!)07, col. 580). The Neo-Babylonian Clironicle, though the 
tablet on which it is written is later in point of time than the Omen-tablet 
from Ashur-bani-pal's Library, clearly represents the more original version. 
There would be no object in amending the Chronicle's text, while its 
mutilation to fit the Liver-omens would naturally introduce inconsistencies, 
which it would be tempting to a copyist to correct. 

- In the commercial tablets of the period of Shar-Gani-.sharri and Naram- 
Sin, reference is frequently made to transport by water. Thus the arrival of 
grain-boats at Lagash is often noted, or arrangements are made for the 
despatch of cattle and asses by boat to other places. 

3 See above, p. 21'J. 

♦ See above, p. 218. 


to enriching the great temple of the Sun-god in 
Northern Babylonia ; while one of his date-formulas 
supports the tradition of his building activity in 
Babylon.^ But such votive texts and records throw no 
light u])on his methods of government, or upon the 
means lie took to retain his hold upon the more out- 
lying districts of his empire. Some striking evidence 
upon this point has, however, been recovered at Tello, 
and this is furnished, not by any formal record or care- 
iiilly inscribed monument, but by some rough lumps of 
clay, which had been broken and thrown on one side as 
useless debris during the reigns of Shar-Gani-sharri 
himself and his successor. 

Along with the dated tablets of this period there 
w^ere found at Tello, in a mound to the S.S.E. of the 
" Tell of Tablets," a number of sun-dried lumps of clay, 
most of them broken in pieces, but bearing traces of 
seal-impressions upon their upper surface." A careful 
comparison and examination of them showed that on 
their under sides impressions of cords and knots were 
still \isible, and it was evident that the clay had been 
used for sealing bales or bundles of objects, which had 
been tied up and secured with cords. Some of the seal- 
impressions bear short inscriptions, consisting of the 
name of the king and that of some high functionary or 
officer of state, such as " Shar-Gani-sharri, the mighty, 
the king of Akkad : Lugal-ushumgal, patesi of Lagash, 
thy servant " •, here the king is addressed in the 
second person by the officer whose name and title 
were engraved upon the seal. Similar inscriptions 
occur upon impressions from the seals of the 
shakkanakku or grand vizir, the magician of the royal 
household, and the king's cupbearer. The seals were 
obviously employed by the officials whose names 
occur in the second part of each inscription, the 
name of the king being also included to give them the 
royal authority. The right to use the royal name was 
evidently a privilege enjoyed only by the higher officials 
of the court. 

From the fact that the broken lumps of clay were 
found at Tello, it is clear that the sealed bundles had 

> See above, p. 22G. ^ ggg Heuzey, " Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. IV., pp. 2 ff. 



been despatched thither from Akkad, and we have in 
them incontestable evidence of a service of convoys 
between Akkad and I^agasli, imder the direct control 
of the king's officers. We may note that in addition to 
the seal-impressions several of the clay fragments were 
inscribed in a cursive hand with the name of an official, 
or private person, for whom the sealed packet was 
intended. Tims a sealed bundle from the grand vizir 
was addressed " To ^Vlla," that from Dada, the magician, 
" To Lugal-ushumgal," whose name occurs in the seal 
on other fragments ; while one sent in Naram-Sin's reign 
appears to have been addressed simply " To Lagash," 
indicating the packet's place of destination. Apart from 
the fact that, with the exception of Lugal-ushumgal, 
the high court-officials mentioned on the seals would 
naturally be living in Akkad, not in Lagash, the 
addresses on the diffisrent fragments, particularly the 
one last referred to, definitely prove that the sealings 
were employed on bundles actually despatched from 
city to city and not stored in any archive or repository. 
It is therefore certain that, during the reigns of Shar- 
Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin, a regular system of com- 
munication was kept up between Lagash and the court, 
and it may legitimately be inferred that the capital was 
linked up in a similar way to the other great cities of 
the empire. 

In addition to the system of official convoys, the 
commercial tablets of this period that have been found 
at Tello bear witness to an active interchange of goods 
and produce between Lagash, Akkad, and other cities 
in the empire.^ Thus in some we read of the despatch 
of gold to Akkad, or of herds of oxen, or flocks of sheep, 
lambs and goats. In return we find Akkad sent grain 
and dates southwards, and probably garments and 
woven stuffs ; the importance of the first two exports 
is indicated by the frequent occurrence of the expres- 
sions " grain of Akkad " and " dates of Akkad " in the 
commercial texts. Moreover, a study of the proper 
names occurring on the tablets suggests that, in con- 
sequence of these commercial relations, a considerable 

' See Thureau-Dangin, " Rec. de tabl.," pp. 44 flF., Kos. 77 ff. ; "Rev. 
dAssyr.," IV., pp. 17 ff. 


Semitic iinmi<Tration now took ])lace from .Akkud and 
the north. Among southern Sumeriun cities Erech 
and Umma, Ninni-esh and Adab had particularly close 
relations with Lai^'ash, while (ifoods despatched from 
Kish, Nippur, and Ur are invoiced in the lists. The 
conquests of Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin were also 
rcrtccted in the articles of commerce that reached the 
market of Lagash, where contributions from JNlagan^ 
ISIclukhkha, and Elam were not infrequently met with, 
and we even find the sale of sla\'es from such distant 
countries as Gutiii and Amurru recorded. To regulate 
the trade relations between the different cities, and to 
instruct his local officials on details of their administra- 
tion, it is probable that the kings of Akkad, like those 
of the First Dynasty of Babylon, wrote letters and 
despatches which were delivered by royal messengers. 
Though no royal letters have been found inscribed with 
the regular epistolary formuke, a few tablets of the 
period contain what are obviously directions from the 

It was probably due to his encouragement of official 
and commercial intercourse between the scattered cities 
over which he ruled, that Shar-Gani-sharri was enabled 
to establish an efficient control over an empire which was 
more extensive than that of any earlier ruler. A study of 
the names upon the Obelisk of Manishtusu makes it clear 
that, already under the kings of Kish, the barriers which 
had previously surrounded and isolated each city-state 
had begun to disappear under the influence of a central 
administration. This process was accelerated in Shar- 
Gani-sharri's reign, and, althougli under the kings of Ur 
and I sin a conservative reaction appears to have set in, 
the great cities never returned to their former state of 
isolation even in the south. Another factor, which may 
have contributed to this process of centralization, may 
probably be traced in Manishtusu's text itself, and 
echoes of it may perhaps be detected in some of the 
later traditions of Sargon's reign. It will be remembered 
that the obelisk records the purchase by the king of 
some large landed estates in the neighbourhood of Kish 
and three other cities in Northern Babylonia, on which 
he intended to settle certain citizens of Akkad and their 


adherents.* This wholesale transference of a large 
section of the population of a city may well lia\e been 
dictated by political motives, and it is possible that it 
was part ot a f^encral system, inaiiouratcd by the kings 
of Kish with the object of substituting national feeling 
in place of the local patriotism of the city-state. Ac- 
cording to this theory, JNIanishtusu's object w^ould hiixe 
been to w^eaken Akkad by the deportation of many ot 
her principal citizens to the neighbourhood of Kish. 

The high social standing of several of the immigrants, 
whose names are emnnerated on the obelisk, suggests a 
comparison with the late traditions concerning Sargon's 
high-handed treatment of "the sons of his palace."^ 
The Neo-Babylonian Chronicle relates that Sargon 
caused " the sons of his palace," that is his relatives and 
personal attendants, to settle for five kasgid around, and 
it adds that over the hosts of the world he reiirned 
supreme. The Omen-tablet represents certain nobles, 
or powerful adherents of the king, as having been dis- 
possessed of their dwellings in consequence of additions 
made to the royal palace ; and they are recorded to have 
appealed to Sargon to tell them where they should go. 
It is quite possible that these episodes in the Assyrian 
and Neo-Babvlonian texts had some such historical basis 
as that suggested in the preceding paragraph. Shar- 
Gani-sharri may have adopted JNIanishtusu's policy and 
carried it out on a more extensive scale. The deporta- 
tions from Akkad, referred to in the late tradition, may 
have been intended to strengthen the loyal elements in 
the provinces. In the course of centin'ies the motive 
wliich prompted the movement would be forgotten or 
misunderstood, and it would be ascribed to some such 
material cause as an increase in the size of the royal 
palace. If this was only part of a settled policy, we 
may conjecture that similar transfers were effected in 
the population of other parts of the empire. 

The effect of such a policy would undoubtedly 
have been to weaken the power of resistance formerly 
possessed by self-contained city-states against the 
hegemony of any one of their number. In this respect 
the kings of Kish and Akkad would only luue been 

» See abovcj pp. 206 ff. - See " Chrouicles," 1., p. 40 f. ; 11., pp. 5, 32. 


carrying out, on a less ambitious scale and over a 
smaller area, the policy which the later Assyrian kings 
so ruthlessly enforced throughout the whole of Western 
Asia. But, although successful for a time, no state 
could be permanently establislied upon such a basis. 
The forces of discontent were hound to come to a head, 
and in Shar-Gani-sharri's own case we may perhaps 
trace to this cause the revolt of all the lands, which is 
recorded to huve taken ]:)lace in his old age. It is 
perhaps significant, too, that Urumush is related to 
have met his end in a palace revolution/ 

Tradition does not speak with any certain voice 
concerning tlie fate of Shar-Gani-sharri. Both the 
Omen-tablet and the Clironicle relate that he was 
besieged in the city of Akkad, and that he sallied forth 
and signally defeated his enemies. But the latter text 
ends its account of Sargon's reign witli a record of 
disaster. " Because of the evil which he had com- 
mitted," the text runs, " the great god IVIarduk was 
angry and he destroyed his people by famine. From 
the rising of the sun unto the setting of the sun they 
opposed him and gave him no rest." The expedition 
against Erech and Naksu, recorded in dates upon 
certain tablets inscribed during the patesiate of Lugal- 
ushumgal, may perhaps be referred to this period of 
unrest during the latter part of Sargon's reign.'' The 
reference to Sargon's closing years on the Neo- Babylonian 
tablet is quite in the manner of the Hebrew books of 
Chronicles. The writer traces Sargon's misfortunes to 
his own evil deeds, in consequence of which the god 
Marduk sent troubles upon him as a punishment. It 
may seem strange that such an ending should follow 
the account of a brilliant and victorious reign. But 
it is perhaps permissible to see in the evil deeds ascribed 
to S argon a reference to his policy of deportation, which 
may have raised him bitter enemies among the priesthood 
and the more conservative elements in tlic population 
of the country. 

■ See above, p. 205. 

2 See 'J"hureau-Daiig-in, " Kccueil de tablettcs," Nos. 99, 136, 176. 'ITie 
possibility may also bo noted tliat the expedition represents one of Narani- 
Sin's successful efforts, at tlic befrinnin^r of bis reign, to recover his pre- 
decessor's empire which had dwindled during his later years. 


There can be little doubt that Sluir-Gani-sharri 
was succeeded on the throne of Akkad by Naram-Sin, 
whom we may regard with considerable confidence as 
his son as well as his successor. In the later tradition 
Xaram-Sin is represented as the son of Sargon, and, 
althougli in his own inscriptions he never mentions 
his father's name, we have contem})orary proof that 
his reign and that of Shar-Gani-sharri were very close 
to one another. The relation of Shar-Gani-sharri's 
pavement in the temple of Ekur to that of Naram-Sin 
and the similar character of their building materials 
suggest that the structures were laid with no long 
interval between them, and the fact that Lugal-ushum- 
gal, patesi of Lagash, was the contemporary of both 
Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin^ supports the pre- 
sumption that the latter was Shar-Gani-sharri's successor 
on the throne. Hence such evidence as we possess is 
in favour of accepting the later tradition of their 
relationship to one another. 

Naram- Sin's fame as a great conqueror, like that 
of his father, survived into later times, and the Omen- 
tablet and the Neo-Baby Ionian Chronicle relate his siege 
of the city of Apirak and the defeat of its governor 
and of Rish-Adad its king. Both texts also briefly 
record his successful expedition against the land of 
Magan. In the Omen-tablet the name of the king is 
wanting, but the lately recovered Chronicle has supplied 
it as Mannu-dannu. On this point the later tradition 
has been strikingly confirmed by the discovery at Susa 
of the base of a diorite statue of the king, on which 
it is recorded that he conquered Magan and slew 
Mani[. . .],' its prince or "lord." The precise position 
of the land of Magan is still unsettled, some setting 

' In addition to Lugal-ushumgal's seal-impression with its address to Shar- 
Gani-sharri, another has been recovered witli a similar address to Naram-Sin, 
which lie evidently employed after the latter's ascension of the throne ; see 
Ileuzey, "Rev. d'Assyr.,"'Vol. IV., p. 11. 

2 ()n the monument the end of the name is wanting. Scheil suggested 
the restoration Maui[um] (see " Textes Elam.-Se'mit.," III., p. 5) a reading that 
would not be inconsistent with the traces on the Unien-tablet (see King, 
" Chronicles," II., p. 39, n. 1). But M.Thureau-Dangin informs me that the 
traces upon the statue are not those of the .sign um, but possibly of dan, so 
that the form Mannu-dannu may be a fairly accurate transcripticn of the 
original name. 



it in the Sinaitic peninsula, others regarding it as a 
portion of Eastern Arabia. In favour of tlie latter 
\'iew it may be noted that from Southern Babylonia 
it would be easy of access by way of the Persian Gulf, 
and the transport of heavy blocks of diorite, which 
Naram-Sin, and at a rather later period Gudea, brought 
irom INlagan, would be more easily effected by water 
than overland. In that case Naram-Sin's invasion of 
Magan was in direct continuation of Shar-Gani-sharri's 
pohcy of extending his empire southwards to include 
the shores of the Persian Gidf. 

In the inscription upon this same statue, which 
Narilm-Sin records was fashioned from diorite brought 
to Akkad for that purpose from the mountains of 
INlagan, he claims the proud title of " king of the four 
quarters (of the world)." Shar-Gani-sharri, in addition 
to his usual titles of "the mighty one, the king of 
Akkad," describes himself in one of the texts upon 
his gate-sockets from Nippur as " king of Enlil's realm," 
but in none of his inscriptions that have been recovered 
does he employ the title "king of the four quarters." 
This may be merely a coincidence, and no inference 
should perhaps be drawn from the absence of the title 
from his texts. On the other hand, it is possible that 
its assumption by Naram-Sin was based on a definite 
claim to a world-wide empire, the full extent of which 
his predecessor had not enjoyed. However this may 
be, we have ample evidence of Nanun-Sin's military 
activity. In the introductory lines on the statue already 
referred to he claims to have been the victor in nine 
separate battles, forced upon him by the attack of 
hostile forces, in the course of a single year. Conquests 
recorded in other inscriptions of Naram-Sin are that 
of Armanu,' and of Satuni, king of I^ulubu.^ The 
latter region lay to the east of Akkad, in the moun- 
tainous region to the north-east of Elam, and its king 
appears to have formed a confederacy of the neigh- 
bouring districts to oppose the advance of Akkadian 
influence in tliat direction. 

The monument, which Naram-Sin set up and dedicated 

' See " Coinptes rendus," 1809, p. .348. 
" See "Textes Elam.-Semit.," I., pp. 53 ff. 



in the temple of his god in commemoration of this 
latter victory, is one of the finest pieces of Babylonian 
sculpture that has yet been recovered/ It is a stele 
of victory, and the face is sculptured with a represen- 
tation of the king conquering Satuni and his other 
enemies in a mountainous country. The king, whose 
figure is on a larger scale than the others, is nearly at 
the summit of a high mountain. He wears a helmet 
adorned with the horns of a bull, and he carries a 
battle-axe and a bow and arrow. Up the mountain 
side and along paths through the trees which clothe 
the lower slopes, the king's alhes and warriors climb 
after him, bearing standards and weapons in their hands. 
Some of the king's foes are fleeing before him, and 
they turn in their flight to sue for mercy, while one 
still grasps a broken spear. Another has been shot 
by the king and crouches on the ground, seeking to 
draw the arrow from his throat. Two others lie prone 
before Naram-Sin, who has planted his foot upon the 
breast of one of them. The peak of the mountain 
rises to the stars. 

The fact that the stele was found at Susa has been 
employed as an argument in favour of regarding Elam 
as a dependency of Akkad during his reign. But, in 
addition to Naram-Sin's own text, the stele bears a 
later inscription of the Elamite king Shutruk-Nakh- 
khunte, from which we may infer that it was captured 
in Northern Babylonia and carried off to Susa as a 
trophy of war. But it is not unlikely that Naram-Sin, 
like Shar-Gani-sharri and the kings of Kish, achieved 
successes against Elam. Apirak, his conquest of which 
tradition records, wms a country within the Elamite 
region, and its capture may well have taken place 
during a successful raid. INlention has been made of 
two early Elamite patesis, whose names have been 
recovered upon a tablet from Tello and an archaic text 
from Susa." The patcsi of Susa, whose name may be read 
as Ilishma, belongs to a period when that city acknow- 
ledged the suzerainty of Akkad. But this single name 
does not prove that Elam, however closely connected 

^ See the frontispiece to this volume. 
^ See above, p. 231, n. 2. 


with Akkad by commercial ties, formed a regular pro- 
vince of the Akkadian empire, Ilishma may have been 
appointed to the throne of Susa by the king of Akkad 
during an invasion of that country, which reached its 
culmination in the deportation of the native king, as 
Shar-Gani-sharri deported the kings of Kutii and 
Amin-ru, and JManishtusu the king of Anshan. The 
avaihible evidence suggests that, during the Dynasty 
of Akkad, Susa and Elam generally enjoyed their 
independence, subject to occasional periods of inter- 

^^''ithin the limits of Sumer and Akkad Naram-Sin 
appears to have followed his father's policy of materially 
benefiting the provincial cities, while keeping their 
administration under his immediate control. Thus he 
continued the service of convoys, and at the same time 
devoted himself to the erection of temples to the gods. 
His rebuilding of the temples of Enlil at Nippur and 
of Shamash at Sippar has been already referred to, 
while his votive onyx vases found at Tello ^ prove that 
he did not neglect the shrines of Lagash. Another 
Sumerian city in which he undertook building opera- 
tions was Ninni-esh, for there he rebuilt the temple 
dedicated to the goddess Ninni in the same year that 
he laid the foundation of the temple at Nippur.* 

But by far the most interesting of his building 
records is the stele sculptured with the figure of him- 
self,^ which is usually known as the Diarbekr stele. 
When first brought to the Museum at Constantinople 
it was said to have been found at Mardin,^ and later on, 
certainly with greater accuracy, to have come from 
Diarbekr.^ As a matter of fact, it was discovered at 
Pir Hussein, a small village built beside a low tell, and 
situated about four and a half hours to the N.N.E. of 
Diarbekr, on the Ambar Su, a stream which rises in 
the lower slopes of the Taurus, and, after running 

' See Heuzey, "Rev. d'Assyr.," IV., p. 1. He also built in Lagash a 
temple to Sin, the Moon-god ; see King, " I'roc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," Nov. 1909. 

^ See the date-form u he on tablets Nos. 8G, lOH, and 144 in " Rec. de 
tabl.," pp. 4G, 53, 05 ; " Konigsinschriften," p 226. 

3 See p. 245, Fig. 59. * See Scheil, " Rec. de trav.," Vol. XV., p 62 

6 See Hilprecht, "Old Bab. Inscr.," II., p. 63, No. 120; and Meyer, 
"Geschichte des Altertums," Bd. I., Hft. II., p. 473. 


parallel to the Sebene Su, joins tlie Tigris below 
Diarbekr. It was found by the villagers some nineteen 
years ago when they were digging for building materials 

Fig, 59. 

Stele sculptured with the figure of Nar8,m-Sin, King of Akkad, 
which was found at Pir Hussein near Diarbekr. In the Imperial 
Ottoman Museum. 

on the site of the aneient city below the tell.^ There is 
no doubt that the stele was found in situ,"^ and it 

^ I visited the site in the summer of 1904, when on my way from Persia to 
Samsun, and the exact spot was pointed out to me where the stele was found. 
Naram-Sin's buildinji', or platform, was on lower ground below the tell, on 
which probably stood the citadel. The stele was found only about five feet 
below the surface, and it is clear that no considerable accunmlation of debris 
covers the remains of the city of Naram-Siu's time, and that its excavation 
would be a comparatively simple matter. 

2 On being discovered by the villagers no particular value was attached tc 
it, and, as it was too large for them to use, it was left lying for three years 
on the spot where it was found. It was then brought to Diarbekr by tlie 
owner of the village, Chialy Effendi, who built it into the edging of a 
fountain in the court of his house on the left bank of the Tigris outside 
the city. On his death, about fourteen years ago, Natik Effendi sent it to the 
Museum at Constantinople. 


furnishes remarkable evidence of the extent of Naram- 
Sin's influence northwards. The inscription upon the 
stone is broken, but it contains a reference to the defeat 
of the king's enemies by the god Enki, or Ea, within 
the four quarters of the world. That Naram-Sin and 
his army sliould have penetrated to the upper reaches 
of the Tigris is remarkable enough in itself, but tliat he 
should have erected a stele of victory, and possibly a 
building, in at least one of the towns he subdued during 
the campaign, suggests that his occupation of this 
region was effective for some time. 

Of Naram-Sin's successors upon the throne of 
Akkad we know little. The name of Bin-Gani-sharri, 
one of his sons, has been recovered upon a seal,^ and on 
a seal-impression from Tello,^ but his name has not 
been foimd with the royal title, so that we do not 
know whether he succeeded his father upon the throne. 
Anotlier son of Naram-Sin, the reading of whose name 
is uncertain, held the post of patesi of Tutu, for his 
name and title have been preserved on a perforated 
plaque from Tello, engraved by Lipush-Iau, who 
describes herself as his daughter and lyre-player to the 
Moon-god, Sin.^ The famous seal of Kalki, the scribe, 
who Avas in the service of Ubil-Ishtar, " the king's 
brother," is also to be assigned to this period, but to 
which reign we cannot tell. The scene engraved upon 
the seal * giA'es an interesting picture of one of these 
early Semitic princes attended by his suite. The 
central figure, who carries an axe over his left 
shoulder, is probably Ubil-Ishtar, and he is followed 
by a Sumerian servant, whom we may identify with 
the scribe Kalki, the holder of the seal. The other 
attendants, consisting of the prince's huntsman, his 
steward with his staff of office, and a soldier, are all 

' See Menant, '' Reclierclios sur la frlyptique orieiitalo," p, 7f), pi. 1, 
No. 1. The seal is thatof Izinum, the scribe^ who was evidently in Bin-Gani- 
sharri'3 service. 

2 The seal of Abi-ishar, the scribe, bore the names of both I^aram-Sin and 
liin-fJani-sharri ; see Tliuroau-Daiiffin, ''Rec. de tald.," p. 70, No. 169. 
Eririda is mentioned on a commercial tablet of the ])criod as the slave of a 
certain Bi-(jani sliarri {op. rit., p. 48, No. 94, " Kev. d'Assyr.,' IW, p. 70), 
wlio may jKtssiblv be identified with Naram-biu's sou. 

3 "Comptes'rendus," 1899, p. 348. 
* See the opposite plate. 



Brif. Afi/s.. A'o. 89137. 



/ir//. JflfS., Ko. !?0126. 

r _ 

f I 


( = 

I 1'^ 


•-^ J I '/ ' ' r r I I 





/>''•'/. Miis., No. S9131. 


bearded Semites. The shaven head and f'riiiired 
garment of the Snmciians are lierc retained hy the 
scribe, snggesting tliat, tliougli the Sumcrians were 
em})l()yed by their contjnerors, Httle racial amalgama- 
tion had taken phice. 

To the time of the kings of Akkad must also be 
assigned the Stele of Victory, two fragments of which 
have been found at Tello, sculptured on both faces with 
bas-reliefs, arranged in registers, above an inscription/ 
The sculptor has represented his battle-scenes as a series 
of hand-to-hand conflicts, and here we see bearded 
Semitic warriors, armed with spear, axe, or bow and 
arrows, smiting their enemies. The inscription is \'ery 
broken, but enough is preserved to indicate that it enume- 
rates a nimiber of estates or tracts of land, some, if not 
all of them, situated in the neighbourhood of I^agash, 
which have been assigned to different high officials. 'I'he 
summary at the end of the text is partly preserv^ed, and 
states that the list comprised seventeen chief cities and 
eiglit chief places, and it ends with a record that may 
probably be restored to read : " liesides ^Vkkad, the 
kingdom, which he had received, [was the patesiate of 
Lagash given to . . . ]." It would thus seem that the 
stele was set up in Lagash to commemorate its acquisi- 
tion by a king of Akkad, who at the same time rewarded 
his own courtiers and officials by assigning them parts 
of the conquered territory. The name of tlie king is 
wanting in the text, and we must depend on conjecture 
to decide the reign or period to wliich it belongs. 

A comparison of the monument with Naram-Sin's 
Stele of Victory will show that, though tlie attitudes of 
the figures are natural and vigorous, the sculptor does 
not display quite the same high qualities of composition 
and artistic arrangement. Tliis fact might conceivably 
be employed in favoiu- of assigning the stele to a period 
of decadence when the dynasty of Shar-Gani-sharri may 
have fallen before the onset of some fresh v/ave of 
Semitic hordes. Hut the impression given by the 
monument is that of a vigorous art struggling towards 

^See Ileuzev, " Comptes rendus,", pp. 22 ff. ; "Rev. •rA^syr.." 
Vol. III., pp. 11.} ir. ; and Thureaii-Daugin, " Kevue Semitique,"' IM'.t?. 
pp. i6C tf. For the sculptures, see p. 248 f., Figs. 60 and Gl. 


perfection ratlier than the rude imitation of a more 
perfect style, and it is probahle tliat we must date it in 
an early, rather than in a late, period during this epoch 
of Semitic domination/ 

The reference to *'Akkad, the kingdom," in the 
summary at the end of the text, renders it difficult to 
assign it to an early king of Kish such as Sharru-Gi, for 
we should then have to assume that Sliar-Gani-sharri's 
dynasty was not the earliest one to rule in Akkad, and 

Fia. 60, 

Portion of a Stele of Victory of a king of Akkad, sculptured in 
relief with battle scenes ; from Tello. 

[In the Louvre : Cat. No. 21.] 

that still earlier Semitic kings reigned in that city before 
the rise of Kish. But in view of the total absence of 
otlier evidence in support of such a conclusion, it is 
preferable to assign the Tello stele provisionally to 
Shar-Gani-sharri himself. It will have been noted that 

* Certain epiarraphic peculiarities in tlie iascription, which are not 
characteristic of the Sargonic period, may perhaps be explained as due to the 
iurtuence of Lagash : the inscription may have been engraved by a scribe of 
that citv, who has reproduced tlie local forin-s of the characters with which he 
was familiar (of. "Rev. Semit.," 1B!»7, p. Ki!)). 



the foes sculptured upon the monument are Semites, 
not Sumerijins, and, if our assumption is correct, we 
may see in them the men of Kish, on whose defeat by 
Shar-Gani-sharri the M'hole of Sumer, inchiding the 
city of I^agash, would have fallen under the rule ol' 
Akkad.' In that case the stele may well have com- 
memorated the decisive victory by which Shar-Gani- 
sharri put an end to the domination of Kish and 
founded his own empire. 

The absence of Sumerians from the battle-scenes in 
the reliefs of the period that we possess is significant of 
their political annihilation before the Semitic onslaught. 

Fig. G1. 

Portion of a Stele of Victory of a king of Akkad, sculptured in 
relief with battle sceues ; from Tello. For the other face of the 
fragment see the opposite page. 

In the scenes engraved upon the stele of Sharru-Gi ^ the 
king's enemies are Semites, so that even in his time we 
have the picture of different Semitic clans or tribes 
contending among themselves for the possession of the 
countries they had overrun. That the racial movement 
was not confined to Akkad and Sumer is proved by 

' As the stele was set up in Lagash, the section dealing' with the distribution 
of that city's land would naturally be added to the historical record. 
^ See above, p. 220. 


Semitic inscriptions of the rulers of other districts. 
Lusirab. Kin^ of Giitiu, has left us a ceremonial mace- 
head, wliich was found at Abu Habba.^ AVhethcr it was 
carried to Sipjiar as spoil of war, or deposited there by 
Lasirab himself, we cannot say ; but its text proves that 
Gutiu was ruled by Semitic monarchs. 'riie neigh- 
bouring district of Lulubu was similarly governed, and 
Anu-banini, one of its kings, has left us sculptured 
images of himself and his goddess Ninni, or Ishtar, 
upon the face of a cliff near Ser-i-Pul-i-Zohab.^ Here 
tlie river Hulvan flows through a natural rift in a low 
range of limestone hills that rise abruptly from the 
plain. The track runs througli the rift in the hills 
beside the stream, and on to the foot of the Zagros 
pass and through the mountains into Elam. Road, 
river, and cliff' form a striking combination, and not only 
Anu-banini but other monarchs who passed that way 
have left their records on the rock. One of these, on 
the further bank of the stream, was set there by another 
early Semitic king, whose sculpture was influenced 
by that of Anu-banini.^ 

Among the various Semitic kingdoms and small 
principalities which were founded and endured for a 
time in this portion of Western Asia, that of Akkad 
won the pre-eminent place. In the mountainous 
regions to the east and north of Elam the immigrants 
doubtless dominated the country, but they found a 
population in a state of culture little more advanced 
than their own, and, if subject to no other influence, 
they must have remained in a condition of semi- 
barbarity. But in Babylonia the case was different. 
Here the vigorous nature of the nomad found a rich 
soil to support its growth and development. 'J'he 

• See tlie plate facing p. 206. 

2 See De Morgan, "Mission scientifique en Perse," ^'ol. IV., p. IGl, 
pi. ix. 

3 When passing' by this route into Persia from Turkey, in the spriiiff of 
1004, I made a careful study of all the sculptureil panels on both sides of the 
Hulvan. ITie second largest panel is that of this early Semitic king; on the 
ledge below the sculpture are traces of an inscription, of wliicli sufficient i? 
preserved to prove that it is written in Semitic Babylonian. 'Ihe sculptured 
panel at Sheikh- Klian, with its frajrnieiitnry Semitic inscription (De Morgan, 
0/). cit., pi. X.), is a very much ruder production, and is probably of a con- 
siderably later date. 


ancient culture of tlie Sumerians was adopted by tlieir 
conquerors, at whose hands it underwent a gradual 
change. The sculptor slowly freed himself from the 
stiff' conventions of his Sumerian teachers, and, while 
borrowing their technical skill, he transformed the work 
of their hands. Such a cylinder-seal as that of Ibni- 
sharru, Shar-Ganni-sharri's scribe, with its design of 
kneeling heroes watering oxen,' is a marvellous product 
of the engraver's art ; while the delicate modelling of 
the figures upon Naram-Sin's stele, their natural 
attitudes, and the decorative arrangement of the 
composition as a wliole, are not approached on any 
earlier monument. The later sculptures of Lagash owe 
much to the influence of Akkadian work. 

In the political sphere the Dynasty of Akkad 
attained a similar position. Not only did her kings 
secure tlie hegemony in Akkad and Sumer, but they 
pushed their influence beyond the limits of Babylonia, 
and cons'olidated an empire in the strict sense of the 
term. His rule over the four quarters of the world 
may have led Naram-Sin to add to his titles, and the 
growth of their power probably increased the tendency 
of these early monarchs to assume the attributes and 
privileges of gods. Of the kings of Kish we have 
evidence that some were deified, and the divine deter- 
minative is set before the name of Shar-Gani-sharri in 
two inscriptions that have come down to us. In nearly 
every text of Naram-Sin the determinative for deity 
precedes his name, and in some of the contemporary 
seal-inscriptions he is even termed "the god of Akkad." 
Under the later kings of Ur the cult of the reigning 
monarch was diligently practised, and his worship was 
continued after death. There is no evidence that this 
custom obtained among the earlier Sumerian kings and 
patesis, and we may with some confidence set its origin 
in this period of Semitic supremacy. That the kings of 
Akkad should have claimed divine honours during their 
own lifetime may probably be connected with the 
increase in their dominion, based upon conquests which 
extended from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean, 
and from Arabia to the mountains of Kurdistan. 

1 See the pauel on the cover of this volume ; and cf. p. 217 f. 



WE ha\'e seen that the Dynasty of Akkad marks 
the cuhninating point attained by the races of 
Sumer and Akkad during the earher periods 
of their history. It is true that the kings of this period 
owed much to their immediate predecessors, but they 
added to and improved their inheritance. Through 
long centuries of slow development the village com- 
munity had gradually been transformed into the city- 
state, and this institution had flourished and had in its 
turn decayed before the centralizing influence of the 
kingdoms of Sumer and Kish. It was on the ruins of 
the latter monarchy that Shar-Gani-sharri founded his 
empire, whicli differed from that of Kish in its extent, 
rather than in the principles of its formation. A 
similarly close connection can be traced between the 
cultural remains of the successive periods with which 
we have hitherto been dealing. The rude, though 
vigorous, artistic efforts of the earlier Sumerians 
furnished the models upon which the immigrant 
Semites of Northern Babylonia improved. In the 
sculpture of Kish and upon cylinder-seals of that period 
we see the transition between the two styles, when the 
aim at a naturalistic treatment sometimes produced 
awkward and grotesque results. The full attainment of 
this aim under the patronage of the Akkadian kings 
gives their epoch an interest and an importance, which, 
from their empire alone, it would not perhaps have 

AVhile the earlier ages of Babylonian history aflbrd 
a striking picture of gradual growth and de\'elopment, 



the periods succeeding the Dynasty of Akkad are 
marked by a certain retrograde movement, or reversion 
to earher ideals. The stimuhis, which produced the 
empire and the art of Akkad, may be traced to the 
influx of fresh racial elements into Northern Babylonia 
and tiieir fusion with the older and more highly cultured 
elements in the south. When the impulse was ex- 
hausted and the dynasties to which it had given rise 
had run their course, little further development along 
these lines took place. Both in art and politics a 
Sumerian reaction followed the period of Semitic power, 
and the estabhshment of the Dynasty of Ur was signifi- 
cant of more than a shifting of political influence south- 
wards. It would appear that a systematic attempt was 
made to return to the earlier standards. But the 
influence of Akkad and her monarchs, though delibe- 
rately ignored and combated, was far from ineffective. 
As the sculptures of Gudea owe much to the period of 
Naram-Sin, so the empire of Dungi was inevitably 
influenced by Shar-Gani-sharri's conquests. There was 
no sudden arrest either of the political or of the cultural 
development of the country. A recovery of power by 
the Sumerians merely changed the direction in which 
further development was to take place. Although, 
when viewed from a general standpoint, there is no 
break of continuity between the epoch of Akkad and 
that of Ur, there is some lack of information with 
regard to events in the intervening period. There is 
every indication that between the reign of Naram-Sin 
and that of Ur-Engur, the founder of the Dynasty of 
Ur, we have to count in generations rather than in 
centuries, but the total length of the period is still 
unknown. The close of the Dynasty of Akkad, as we 
have already seen, is wrapped in mystery, but the gap 
in our knowledge may fortunately to some extent be 
bridged. At this point the city of Lagasli once more 
comes to our assistance, and, by supplying the names 
of a number of her patesis, enables us to arrange a 
sequence of rulers, and thereby to form some estimate 
of the length of the period involved. 

It will be remembered that under Shar-Gani-sharri 
and Naram-Sin a certain Lugal-ushumgal was patesi of 


Lagiish, and that the impressions of liis seals have been 
recovered which he employed during the reigns of these 
two monarchs.^ The names of three other patesis of 
Lagash are known, who must also be assigned to the 
period of the Dynasty of Akkad, since they are 
mentioned upon tablets of that date. These are Ur- 
Babbar, Ur-E, and Lugal-bur ; the first of these appears 
to have been the contemporary of Naram-Sin,' and in 
that case he must have followed I^ugal-uslmmgal. As 
to Ur-E and Lugal-bur, we have no information beyond 
the fact that they lived during the period of the kings 
of Akkad. A further group of tablets found at Tello, 
differentiated in type from those of the Dynasty of 
Akkad on the one hand, and on the other from tablets 
of the Dynasty of Ur, furnishes us with the names of 
other patesis to be set in the period before the rise of 
Ur-Engur. Three of these, Basha-mama,^ Ur-mama, 
and Ug-me, were probably anterior to Ur-Bau, who has 
left us ample proof of his buildmg activity at Lagash. 
We possess a tablet dated in the accession year of Ur- 
mama, and another dated during the patesiate of Ug-me, 
in the year of the installation of the high priest in 
Nina.* A sealing of this last patesi's reign has also been 
found, which supports the attribution of this group of 
tablets to the period between the Sargonic era and that 
of Ur. The subject of the engraving upon the seal is 
the adoration of a deity, a scene of very common occur- 
rence during the later period ; but by its style and 
treatment the work vividly recalls that of the epoch of 
Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin. On the strength of 
this e\idence it has been argued that Ug-me's period 

1 See above, pp. 236 f., 241. 

2 It has been sufrj;:ested tliat Ur-E was Naram-Sin's contemporary, since 
his name and that of Naram-Sin arc both found on the same tablet (see 
ITiureau-Dangin, "^ Jlcc. de tabl.," pp. iii. f., 45, No. 83, and "Konigsia- 
schriften," p. 69, n. 1) ; but the phrase in which Naram-Sin's name occurs, like 
that wliich precedes it, appears to refer to a past event. On the other hand, 
Ur-Babbar is mentioned on tlii.s tablet in the same phrase with Naram-Sin, 
and, although no title follows his name, wo may probably identify him with 
" Ur-Babbar, the patesi," referred to on another tablet of this class {pp. cit., 
No. 132) ; hero and in similar passages, where Laga.-li is not named, it is 
obviously implied. The name of Lugal-bur is found upon a taljlet of the 
Sargonic period (.see Thurcau-Dangin, " Rev. d'Assyr.," \'ol. V., p. 08). 

3 " Rec. de tabl.," p. 73, No. 181. 
* Op. cit., Nos. 184 and 183. 


was not far from that of Lugal-ushunigal, Ur-E, and 

One of the documents of this period is dated during 
the patesiate of Ur-Baii himself, in the year in whicli he 
undertook certain extensive works of irrigation, while 
others are dated in the year of Ur-gar's accession, and 
in that which followed the accession of Nammakhni.* 
From other evidence we know that Nammakhni was 
Ur-Bau's son-in-hiw, since he espoused Ningandu, II r- 
Bau's daughter, and secured through her his title to the 
throne.^ Ur-gar, too, must belong to the generation 
following Ur-Bau, since a female statue has been found 
at Tello, which was dedicated to some deity by a 
daughter of Ur-Bau on behalf of lier own life and that 
of Ur-gar, the patesi.* Tablets are also dated in the 
accession-years of Ka-azag, Galu-Bau, and Galu-Gula,® 
and their contents furnish indications that they date 
from about the same time.® Ur-Ninsun, whose name 
and title occur on the fragment of a bowl very similar 
to that employed by Nammakhni's wife,^ is not men- 
tioned on the tablets, but several are dated in the reigns 
of Gudea and of his son Ur-Ningirsu.^ Now, in the 
reign of Dungi, the son of Ur-Engur, there lived a high 
priest of the goddess Nina named Ur-Ningirsu ; and, 
if we may identify this priestly official Avith the patesi 
of that name, as is very probable,^ we obtain a definite 
ponit of contact between the later history of Lagash and 
that of Ur. But even if the synchronism between Ur- 
Ningirsu and Dungi be regarded as non-proven, there 

* See Thureau-Dan.ffin, " Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. V'., p. 68. 

2 "Rec. de tabl.,"'No9. 185-187. 

3 See Heuzey, "Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol.11., p. 79. 

* See Thureau-Daugin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. V., p. 98, and " Konigs- 
inschriften^" p. 62 f. 

6 " Rec. de tabl.," Nos. 188-190. 

" It is improbable that we should identify Ka-azag-, the patesi, with 
Ka-azag, the father of Ninkagina, who dedicated a mace-liead to Uri-zi on 
behalf of her own life and that of Kammakhni, the patesi (of. " Cun. Texts in 
the Brit. Mus.," I., pi. 50). For Ninkagina was Nammakhni's mother, and 
Ka-azag was therefore his grandfather. But if Nammakhni's grandfather liad 
held the patesiate, his daughter would not have omitted the title after his 
name ; moreover, Nammakhni himself obtained the patesiate through 
marriage, not by inheritance. 

7 See Heuzey, "Rev. d'Assyr.," \'ol. IT., p. 79. 

8 " Rec. de tabl.," Nos. 192 If., 207, and 209-211. 

9 See below, pp. 274 ff. 


is no doubt that no long interval separated Gudea's 
reign from the Dynasty of Ur. 'I'he eharacter of the 
art and the style of writing which we find in I^agash 
at this time are so similar to those of Ur, that the one 
period must have followed the other without a break. 
A striking example of the resemblance which existed 
in the artistic productions of the two cities at this time 
is afforded by the votive copper cones, or nails, of 
Gudca and Dungi, surmounted by the figures of a bull 

Fig. 62. 

Fig. 63, 

Copper figures of bulls surmounting cones which ^vc^e employed 
as votive oSeringa in the reigns of Gudea and Dungi. 

[Ddc, pi. 28, Figs. 5 and 6 ; Cat. Nos. 159 and 162.] 

couchant. A glance will show the slight changes in 
the form and treatment of the subject which have been 
introduced by the metal-workers of Dungi's reign. 

From the brief summary given in the preceding 
paragraphs it will have been noted that we have 
recovered the names of some twelve patesis of Lagash, 
who may be assigned to tlie period between the dynas- 
ties of Akkad and Ur. Of these twelve names no less 
than eleven occur upon a group of tablets, which were 
found together at Tello, and are marked out by their 


shape and contents as belonging, to a single period. 
The tablets themselves are of unbaked clay, and they 
form a transition between the types of Akkad and Ur. 
In the last of the reigns mentioned it is probable that 
we may trace a synchronism with the Dynasty of Ur, 
and, althougli no actual point of contact can yet be 
established with the Dynasty of Akkad, such evidence 
as that furnished by Ug-me's sealing suggests that no 
considerable lapse of time can have taken place. That 
these twelve patesis were the only ones who ruled at 
Lagash during this interval is improbable, and at any 
time the names of other rulers may be recovered. But 
it is certain the reigns of many of these patesis were 
extremely brief, and that we have not to do with a 
single dynasty, firmly established throughout the whole 
period, whose separate members, after their accession, 
each held the throne for the term of his natural life. 
We have definite proof that several of the patesis, such 
as Ka-azag, Galu-Bau, and Galu-Gula, ruled only for a 
few years, and it would seem that at certain points 
during this period a change of rulers took place in 
Lagash with considerable frequency. 

The employment of the title of patesi, and the total 
absence of that of " king " at this time, suggests that 
Lagash had not succeeded in establishing her indepen- 
dence, and still owed allegiance to some alien dynasty. 
It is in accordance with this view that the dates 
inscribed upon the commercial tablets do not refer 
to events of a military character. We may conclude 
that, at any rate until the reign of Gudea, Lagash and 
her rulers were not concerned to enforce their authority 
over other cities, nor to defend their own border from 
attack. The existence of a more powerful city, claim- 
ing the hegemony in Babylonia, would account for the 
absence of military enterprise reflected in the date- 
formula; and in the foundation-records of the time. 
For such a city, while guaranteeing the integrity of 
each of her tributary states, would have resented the 
inauguration of an ambitious policy by any one of 
them. On the other hand, the purely local character 
of the events commemorated in the date-formulae is no 
less significant. These are without exception drawn 



from the local history of Lagash, and betray no evidence 
of the authority exercised by a foreign suzerain. It is 
therefore probable that during the greater part of this 
period I.,agash enjoyed a considerable measure of 
autonomy, and that such bonds as may have united 
her to any central administration were far less tightly 
drawn than at the time of Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram- 
Sin. Like Lagash, her old rival Umma seems to have 
survived as a patesiate under the later Semitic rulers 
in the north, and it is probably to this time that we 
may assign Galu-Babbar, the patesi of that city, three 
of whose votive cones are preserved in the British 
INIuseum.^ During the earlier part of tliis period 
Lagash presents the picture of a compact and peaceful 
state, content to develop her own resources. A con- 
siderable increase of power is noticeable in the reign 
of Gudea, the most famous ruler of the period, who, 
though still retaining the title of patesi, must be 
regarded as practically an independent sovereign, since 
he was strong enough to undertake a successful cam- 
paign in Elam, and imported his building materials 
from Arabia and the Syrian coast. 

With the exception of Gudea, the only ruler of this 
period who has left us any considerable records or 
remains is Ur-Bau, the predecessor of Nammakhni and 
Ur-gar upon the throne of Lagash. We possess a 
small diorite statue of this ruler, which, like most of 
those found at Tello, is without its head.^ It is a 
standing figure, and its squat and conventional pro- 
portions suffice to show that it must date from a rather 
earlier period than tlie larger and finer statues of Gudea, 
which are fashioned from the same hard material. Gudea 
definitely states that he fetched the diorite for his series 
of large statues from JVIagan, but Ur-Bau makes no 
such boast ; and, although it is clear that his stone must 
have come from the same quarries, we may probably 
conclude that the small block he employed for his 
figure had not been procured as the result of a special 
expedition. In fact, such records as he has left us 
portray him as devoting all his energies to the 

* See the opposite plate ; aiul cf. "('uii. Texts," Pt. 1., pi. 50. 
^ See De Sarzec, " Dec. eu Clialdc'e/' pi. 7. 




Brit. Mils., Xos. 15782, 91046, and <)\o(>-%. 




Brit. Mks., Xos. 91152 and <)x\yt. 


building of temples within the different quarters of 
his city.^ 

His chief care appears to have been the rebuilding, 
upon a new and enlarged site, of E-ninnu, the great 
temple of Ningirsu at Lagash, in which he placed the 
statue of himself that has been recovered. Little of 
this temple now remains in the mounds of Tello, beyond 
a wall the lower part of which "vvas found still standing 
under the south-east corner of the later palace erected 
in the second century b.c' In addition to the rebuilding 
of the temple of the city-god, Ur-Bau records that he 
erected three temples in Girsu in honour of the god- 
desses Ninkharsag and Geshtin-anna, and of Enki, " the 
king of Eridu." In Uru-azagga he built a temple for 
the goddess Bau, and in Uru, another quarter of the 
city, he constructed a shrine in honour of Ninni, or 
Nin-azag-nun, the goddess Ishtar. Other deities hon- 
oured in a similar way by Ur-Bau were Nindar, Ninmar, 
and Ninagal, the last of whom stood in the mystical 
relation of mother to the patesi. Attached to E-ninnu 
he also built a " House of the Asses " in honour of 
Esignun, the deity whose duty it was to tend the sacred 
asses of Ningirsu. 

Ur-Bau may probably be regarded as representative 
of the earlier patesis of this epoch, who, while acting 
with freedom and independence within the limits of 
their own state, refrained from embarking on any policy 
of conquest or expansion. With the accession of Gudea 
a distinct change is noticeable in the circumstances of 
Lagash. Like his predecessors, he devoted himself to 
the building of temples, but his work was undertaken 
on a wider and more sumptuous scale. Of all the kings 
and patesis of Lagash, he is the one under whom the 
city appears to have attained its greatest material pros- 
perity, vv'hich found its expression in a lavish arclii- 
tectural display. Although not much of his great 
temple of E-ninnu still survives at Tello, his monuments 
are more numerous than all the others that have been 
recovered on that site.^ Moreover, the texts engi'aved 

^ See Thureau-Dangiu, " Konigsiuschriften^" pp. 60 if. 

' See above, p. 18 f. 

^ Foi'his inscribed monuments, see " Konigsinschriften," pp. 66 ff. 


upon his statues, and inscribed upon the great clay 
cyhnders which he buried as foundation-records in the 
structure of E-ninnu, are composed in a florid style 
and form a striking contrast to the dry votive formulas 
employed by the majority of his predecessors. The 
cylinder-inscriptions especially are cast in the form of 
a picturesque narrative, adorned with striking similes 
and a wealth of detailed description such as are not 
found in the texts of any other period. In fact, Gudea's 
records appear to have been inspired by the novelty 
and magnitude of his architectural constructions and 
the variety of sacred ornament with which they were 

We have no information as to the events which 
led to his accession, beyond the negative evidence 
afforded by the complete absence of any genealogy 
from his inscriptions. Like Ur-Bau, Gudea does not 
name his father, and it is possible that he was a man 
of obscure or doubtful birth. The energy which he 
displayed as patesi is sufficient to account for his rise 
to power, and the success which attended his period 
oi rule may be held to have amply justified a break 
in the succession. Another problem suggested by a 
study of his texts concerns the source of the wealth 
which enabled him to undertake the rebuilding and 
refurnishing of the temples of Lagash upon so elaborate 
a scale. The cause of such activity we should naturally 
seek in the booty obtained during a number of suc- 
cessful campaigns, but throughout the whole of his 
inscriptions we have only a single reference to an act 
of war. On the statue of himself in the character of 
an architect, holding the plan of E-ninnu upon his 
knees, he gives in some detail an account of the distant 
regions whence he obtained the materials for the con- 
struction of Ningirsu's temple. At the close of this 
list of places and their products, as though it formed 
a continuation of his narrative, he adds tlie record that 
he smote with his weapons the town of Anshan in 
Elam and offered its booty to Ningirsu. This is the 
only mention of a victory that occurs in Gudea's 
inscriptions, and, although in itself it proves that he 
was sufficiently independent to carry on a war in 


Elam on his own account, it does not throw hght upon 
tlie other causes of his success. 

The absence of military records from Gudea's texts 
is rendered the more striking, when ^\e read the names 
of the countries he hiid under contribution for tlie 
materials employed in the building of E-niimii. The 
fullest geographical list is that given on tlie statue of 
the architect with the plan,^ and, although unfortunately 
some of the places mentioned have still to be identified, 
the text itself furnishes sufficient information to demon- 
strate the wide area of his operations. Gudea here 
tells us that from INIount Amanus, the mountain of 
cedars, he fetched beams of cedar-wood measuring fifty 
and even sixty cubits in length, and he also brought 
down from the mountain logs of urkarinnu-wood five- 
and-twenty cubits long. From the town of Ursu in 
the mountain of Ibla he brought zabalu-wood, great 
beams of ashukhu-wood and plane-trees. From Umanu, 
a mountain of JNIenua, and from Easalla, a mountain 
of Amurru, he obtained great blocks of stone and made 
stelae from them, which he set up in the court of 
E-ninnu. From Tidanu, another mountain of Amurru, 
he brought pieces of marble, and from Kagalad, a 
mountain of Kimash, he extracted copper, which he 
tells us he used in making a great mace-head. From 
the mountains of Melukhkha he brought ushu-wood, 
which he employed in the construction of the temple, 
and he fetched gold-dust from the mountain of Khakhu 
and with it he gilded a mace-head carved with the 
heads of three lions. In Gubin, the mountain of 
khulupj3u-wood, he felled khuluppu-trees ; from Madga 
he obtained asphalt, which he used in making the plat- 
form of E-ninnu ; and from the mountain of Barshib 
he brought down blocks of nalua-stone, which he loaded 
into great boats and so carried them to Lagash in order 
to strengthen the base of the temple. 

The above list of places makes it clear that Gudea 
obtained his wood and stone from mountains on the 
coast of Syria and in Arabia, and his copper from mines 
in Elam. On the first of his cylinders he also states 
that the Elamite came from Elam and the man of Susa 

1 See De Sarzec, " Dec. en Clialdee/' pi. 16-19. 


from Susa, presumably to take part as skilled craftsmen 
in the construction of the temple. In this account lie 
does not mention the names of so many places as in 
the statue-inscription, but he adds some picturesque 
details with reirard to the difficulties of transport he 
encountered. Thus he records that into the mountain 
of cedars, where no man before had penetrated, he cut 
a road for bringing down the cedars and beams of other 
precious woods. He also made roads into the moun- 
tains where he quarried stone, and, in addition to gold 
and copper, he states that he obtained silver also in 
the mountains. The stone he transported by water, 
and he adds that the ships bringing bitumen and plaster 
from JNIadga were loaded as though they were barges 
carrying grain. 

A third passage in Gudea's texts, referring to the 
transport of materials from a distance, occurs upon the 
colossal statue of himself which he erected in E-ninnu.^ 
Here he states that Magan, Melukhkha, Gubi, and 
Dilmun collected wood, and that ships loaded with 
wood of all kinds came to the port of Eagash. More- 
over, on eight out of his eleven statues he records that 
Lhe diorite, from which he fashioned them, was brought 
from Magan. In his search for building materials, he 
asserts that he journeyed from the lower country to the 
upper country ; and, when summarizing the area over 
whicli he and his agents ranged, he adopts an ancient 
formula, and states that Ningirsu, his beloved king, 
opened the ways for him from the Upper to the Lower 
Sea, that is to say, from the Mediterranean to the 
Persian Gulf. 

The enumeration of these distant countries, and 
Gudea's boastful reference to the Upper and the Lower 
Sea, might, perhaps, at first sight be regarded as con- 
stituting a claim to an empire as extensive as that of 
Shar-Gani-sharri and Narain-Sin. But it is a remark- 
able fact that, with the exception of Lagash and her 
constituent townsliips, Gudea's texts make no allusion 
to cities or districts situated within the limits of Sinner 
and Akkad. Even the names of neighbouring great 
towns, such as Ur, Ercch, and Larsa, are not once 

» See " Dec. en Clialde'e," pi. 9. 


cited, and it can only be inferred that they enjoyed 
with Lagash an equal measure of independence. But 
if Gudea's authority did not extend over neighbouring 
cities and districts within his own country, we can 
hardly conclude that he exercised an effective control 
over more distant regions. In fact, we must treat liis 
references to foreign lands as evidence of commercial, 
not of political, expansion. 

Gudea's reign may be regarded as marking a revival 
of Sumerian prosperity, consequent on the decay of 
Semitic influence and power in the north. The fact 
that he was able to import his wood and stone from 
Syria, and float it unmolested down the Euphrates, 
argues a considerable weakening of the northern cities. 
^Vhether Akkad, or some other city, still claimed a 
nominal suzerainty over the southern districts it is 
impossible to say, but it is at least clear that in the 
reign of Gudea no such claim was either recognized or 
enforced. We may suppose tliat Lagash and the other 
great cities in the south, relieved from the burden of 
Semitic domination, enjoyed a period of peace and 
tranquillity, which each city employed for the develop- 
ment of her material resources. The city of Ur was 
soon to bring this state of affairs to a close, by claiming 
the hegemony among the southern cities and founding 
the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad by force of arms. 
But during Gudea's reign Ur appears to have made no 
movement, and Lagash and the other great cities of 
tlie land may be pictured as maintaining commercial 
relations with each other, unhampered by the striving 
of any one of them for political supremacy. 

It is possible that we may trace the unparalleled 
building activity, which characterized Gudea's reign, in 
part to a development in the art of building, which 
appears to have taken place at about this period. It 
has been suggested that both Gudea and Ur-Engur, 
the founder of the Dynasty of Ur, participated in the 
same great architectural movement,^ and proof of this 
has been seen in their common employment of the 
smaller square brick, measuring from about twelve to 
thirteen inches, which was more easy to handle than 

* Cf. Heuzey, "Catalogue des antiquiU's chaldeennes," p. 49- 


tlie larp^er bricks employed by Ur-l^au and at the time 
of the Dynasty of Akkad. The inherent advantages of 
this form of brick are attested by its retention, witli but 
shght variations, down to the end of the Babylonian 
empire. That Gudea himself set considerable store by 
the form of the bricks which he employed would seem 
to follow from the passage in his first cylinder-inscrip- 
tion, where he describes the ceremonies with which he 
inaugurated their manufacture, including the offer of 
sacrifices and the pouring of a libation into the sacred 
mould. ^ The use of an improved material may well 
have incited him to rebuild the greater number of the 
sanctuaries in J^agash on their ancient sites, but enlarged 
and beautified in accordance with the new architectural 
ideas. From another passage in his texts it would 
seem that he definitely claimed to have inaugurated a 
novel form of building, or decoration, such as no patesi 
before him had employed.^ The meaning of the phrase 
is not quite certain, but it may, perhaps, have reference 
to the sculptured reliefs w4th w^hich he adorned E-ninnii. 
It may also refer to the use of raised pilasters for the 
adornment of facades and external walls, a form that is 
characteristic of later Babylonian architecture, but is 
not found in the remains of buildings at Lagash before 
Gudea's time. 

In addition to E-ninnu, the great temple of the 
city-god Ningirsu, Gudea records that he rebuilt the 
shrines dedicated to Bau and Ninkharsag, and E-anna, 
the temple of the goddess Ninni, and he erected temples 
to Galahm and Dunshagga, two of Ningirsu's sons. In 
Uru-azagga he rebuilt Gatumdug's temple, and in Girsu 
three temples to Nindub, Meslamtaea, and Nindar, the 
last of w^hom was associated with the goddess Nina, in 
whose honoiu' he made a sumptuous throne. In Girsu, 
too, he built a temple to Ningishzida, his patron god, 
whom he appears to have introduced at this time into 
the pantheon of Lagash. One of the most novel of his 
reconstructions was the E-pa, the temple of the seven 
zones, which he erected for Ningirsu. Gudea's building 
probably took the form of a tower in seven stages, a 

• Cvliiulor A, col. X VI 1 1., 11. 6 ff. 

s Statue B, col. VL^ 1. 77— col. VII. 1. G. 


true ziggiinit, which may be compared with those of 
Ur-Engiir. But the work on which he most prided 
himself was the rebuilding of E-ninnu, and to this he 
devoted all the resources of his city. From a study of 
the remains of this temple that were uncovered at 
Tello by M. de Sarzec, it would appear that Gudea 
surrounded tlie site of Ur-Bau's earlier building with an 
enclosure, of which a gateway and a tower, decorated 
with pilasters in re- 

lief, are all that 
remains.^ These 
were incorporated in 
the structure of the 
late palace at Tello, 
a great part of whicli 
was built with bricks 
from the ancient 
temple. It is diffi- 
cult to determine 
the relation of these 
slight remains at 
Tello, either to the 
building described 
by Gudea himself, 
or to the plan of a 
fortified enclosure 
which one of the 
statues of Gudea, as 
an architect, holds 
upon his knees. 

Fig. 64. 

Iiiin |ii'| |ii| HI I I 

I I I 


I I I I I 

Fig. 65. 

from statue B. 

[D«Jc., pi. 15, Figs. 1 and 2.] 

Tablets with architect's rule and stilus, -which 

the statues B and F of Gudea bear upon their knees. 

That the plan was -^ ground-plan is engraved on the upper tablet 

. I frnm sf.n.hiifi B 

intended, at any rate, 

for a portion of the 

temple is clear from th3 inscription, to the effect that 

Gudea prepared the statue for E-nimiu, which he had 

just completed. 

The detailed account of the building of this temple, 
which Gudea has left us, affords a very vivid picture of 
the religious life of the Sumerians at this epoch, and of 
the elaborate ritual with which they clothed the cult 
and worship of their gods. The record is given upon 

* Cf. Heazey, " Comptes rendus," 1894, p. 34 ; and see above, p. 18 f. 


two huge cylinders of clay, one of which was inscribed 
while the work of building was still in progress, and the 
other after the building and decoration of the temple 
had been completed, and Ningirsu had been installed 
within his shrine. They were afterwards buried as 
foundation-records m the structure of the tem])le itself, 
and so have survived in a wonderfully well-preserved 
condition, and were recovered during the French exca- 
vations at Tello.^ From the first of the cylinders we 
learn that Gudea decided to rebuild the tem])le of the 
city-god in consequence of a prolonged drought, which 
was naturally ascribed to the anger of the gods. The 
water in the rivers and canals had fallen, the crops 
had suffered, and the land was threatened with famine, 
when one night the patesi had a vision, by means of 
which the gods communicated tlieir orders to him. 

Gudea tells us that he was troubled because he could 
not interpret the meaning of the dream, and it was only 
after he had sought and received encouragement from 
Ningirsu and Gatumdug that he betook himself to the 
temple of Nina, the goddess who divines the secrets of 
the gods. From her he learnt that the deities who had 
appeared to him in his vision had been Ningirsu, the 
god of his city, Ningishzida, his patron deity, his sister 
Nidaba, and Nindub, and that certain words he had 
heard uttered were an order that he should build 
E-ninnu. He had beheld Nindub drawing a plan upon 
a tablet of lapis-lazuli, and this Nina explained was the 
plan of the temple he should build. Nina added 
instructions of her own as to the gifts and offerings the 
patesi was to make to Ningirsu, whose assistance she 
promised him in the carrying out of the work. Gudea 
then describes in detail how he obtained from Ningirsu 
himself a sign that it was truly the will of the gods that 
he should build the temple, and how, having consulted 
the omens and found them favourable, he proceeded to 
purify the city by special rites. In the course of this 

* For their text, see De Sarzec, " Dec. en Chaldee," pi. 33-.3fl ; Price, 
"Tlie Great Cylinder Inscriptions A and B of Gudea'' ; and Toscanne, " Les 
Cylindres de Gud(^a" ; for tlieir translation .see Tlmreau-Dangin, ''Lea 
Cylindres de Goudca,'' and "Konigsinschriften,'' pp. 88 ff. ; a summary and 
discussion of their contents are given by King and Hall, " Pvgypt and Western 
Asia," pp. 1'J5 if. 


work of preparation he drove out the wizards and 
sorcerers from Lagash, and kindled a fire of cedar and 
other aromatic woods to make a sweet savour for the 
gods ; and, after completing the purification of the city, 
he consecrated the surrounding districts, the sacred 
cedar-groves, and the herds and cattle belonging to the 
temple. He then tells us how he fetched the materials 
for the temple from distant lands, and hiauguratcd 
the manufacture of the 
bricks with solemn rites 
and ceremonies. 

We are not here con- 
cerned with Gudea's elabo- 
rate description of the new 
temple, and of the sump- 
tuous furniture, the sacred 
emblems, and the votive 
objects with which he en- 
riched its numerous courts 
and shrines. A large part 
of the first cylinder is de- 
voted to this subject, and 
the second cylinder gives 
an equally elaborate ac- 
count of the removal of 
the god Ningirsu from his 
old shrine and his installa- 
tion in the new one that -,. , ^ . ^ n 

Figure of a god seated upon a throne, 
had been prepared tor him. who may probably be identified with 

This event took place on a ^^'""^^^l"^'^^'- 
duly appomted day m the ^Dic, pi. 22, Fig. 5; Cat. No. 24.] 
new year, after the city 

and its inhabitants had undergone a second course of 
purification. Upon his transfer to his new abode Ningirsu 
was accompanied by his wife Bau, his sons, and his sev^en 
virgin daughters, and the numerous attendant deities 
who formed the members of his household. These 
included Galalim, his son, whose special duty it was to 
guard the throne and place the sceptre in the hands of 
the reigning patesi ; Dunshagga, Ningirsu's water- 
bearer ; Lugal-kurdub, his leader in battle ; Lugal-sisa, 
his counsellor and chamberlain ; Shakanshabar, his 

Fig. 66. 


grand vizir ; Uri-zi, the keeper of his harim ; Ensigniln, 
who tended his asses and drove his chariot ; and 
Enliihni, the shepherd of his kids. Other deities who 
accompanied Xinc^irsu were his musician and flute- 
player, his singer, the cultivator of his lands, who looked 
after the machines for irrigation, the guardian of the 
sacred fish-ponds, the inspector of his birds and cattle, 
and the god who superintended the construction of 
houses within the city and fortresses upon the city- wall. 
All these deities were installed in special shrines within 
E-ninnii, that they might be near Ningirsuand ready at 
any moment to carry out his orders. 

The important place which ritual and worship 
occupied in the national life of the Sumerians is well 
illustrated by these records of the building and conse- 
cration of a single temple. Gudea's work may have 
been far more elaborate than that of his predecessors, 
but the general features of his plan, and the ceremonies 
and rites which he employed, were doubtless fixed 
and sanctified by long tradition. His description of 
Ningirsu's entourage proves that the Sumerian city-god 
was endowed with all the attributes and enjoyed all the 
pri^•ileges of the patesi himself, his human counterpart 
and representative. His temple was an elaborate 
structure, which formed the true dwelling-place of its 
owner and his divine household ; and it included lodgings 
for the priests, treasure-chambers, store-houses, and 
granaries, and pens and stabling for the kids, sheep and 
cattle destined for sacrifice. It is interesting to note 
that in the course of building Gudea came across a 
stele of Lugal-kisalsi, an earlier king of Erech and Ur.^ 
From the name which he gave it we may infer that he 
found it in Girnun, which was probably one of the 
shrines or chapels attached to E-ninnu ; and he care- 
fully preserved it and erected it in the forecourt of the 
temple. In the respect which he showed for this 
earlier record, he acted as Nabonidus did at a later day, 
\Nlien he came across the foundation-inscriptions of 
Naram-Sin and Shagarakti-Buriash in the course of his 
rebuilding of E-babbar and E-ulmash, the temples of 
Sliamash and of the goddess Anunitu. 

» Cf. Cylinder A, col. XXII I., 11. 8 ff. ; see above, p. l!)9 f. 




In the Loii7'rv ; /'/into, hy .}/,ssrs. MansiU <5^ Co. 


Of the artistic productions of Gudea's period tlie 
most striking that have come down to us are the series 
of diorite statues of himself, which were found together 
in the late palace at Tello. From the mscriptions upon 
them it is clear that they were originally prepared by 
the patesi for dedication in the principal temples of 
Lagash, which he either founded or rebuilt. Three were 
installed in E-ninnu, of which one is the statue of the 
architect with the plan, and another, a seated figure, 
is the only one of the series of colossal proportions. 
Three more were made for the temple of Bau, and 
others for Ninni's temple E-anna, and the temples of 
the goddesses Gatumdug and Ninkharsag. The small 
seated figure, destined for the temple of Ningishzida, is 
the only one of which we possess the head, for this was 
discovered by Commandant Cros during the more 
recent diggings at Tello, and was fitted by I\I. Heuzey 
to the body of the figure which had been preserved in 
the Lou\Te for many years.^ From the photographic 
reproduction it will be seen that the size of the head is 
considerably out of proportion to that of the body ; and 
it must be admitted that even the larger statues are not 
all of equal merit. While in some of them the stiffness 
of archaic convention is still apparent, others, such as 
the seated statues for E-ninnii and that of the architect 
with the rule from the temple of Gatumdug, are dis- 
tinguished by a fine naturalism and a true sense of 

Some interesting variations of treatment may also 
be noted in two of the standing statues from the temple 
of Bau. One of these is narrow in the shoulders and 
slender of form, and is in striking contrast to the 
other, which presents the figure of a strong and broad- 
shouldered man. It would seem that the statues \vere 
sculptured at different periods of Gudea's life, and from 
the changes observable we may infer that he ascended 
the throne while still a young man and that his reign 
must have been a long one. The diorite which he used 
for them was very highly prized for its durability and 
beauty, and the large block that was required for his 

• See the plate opposite p. 268 ; and cf. Heuzey^ " Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. VL, 
pp. 18 ff. 


colossal figure appears, when the carving was completed, 
to have been regarded as far more precious than 
lapis-lazuli, silver, and other metals.^ Certainly the 
preparation of so hard a stone presented more difficulty 
than that of any other material, and that Gudea's 
sculptors should have learnt to deal successfully with 
such large masses of it argues a considerable advance 
in the development of their art. 

The small copper figures of a kneeling god grasping 
a cone are also characteristic of Gudea's period, but in 
design and workmanship they are surpassed by the 
similar votive figure which dates from Ur-Bau's reign.^ 
A fine example of carving in relief is furnished by the 
oval panel, in which Gudea is represented as being led 
into the presence of his god ; ^ a similar scene of worship, 
though on a smaller scale, is engraved upon his cylinder- 
seal." A happy example of carving in the round, as 
exhibited by smaller objects of this period, is his small 
mace-head of breccia decorated with the heads of three 
lions. In design this clearly resembles the mace-head 
referred to on one of the statues from E-ninnu, though, 
unlike it, the small mace-head was probably not gilded, 
since the inscription upon it mentions the mountain in 
Syria whence the breccia was obtained. But other 
carved objects of stone that have been recovered may 
well have been enriched in that way, and to their 
underlying material they probably owe their preservation. 
The precious metal may have been stripped from these 
and the stone cores thrown aside ; but similar work in 
soUd gold or silver would scarcely have escaped the 
plunderer's hands. 

With the exception of the period of drought, in con- 
sequence of which Gudea decided to rebuild Ningirsu's 
temple, it is probable that during the greater part of his 
reign the state of Lagash enjoyed unparalleled abundance, 
such as is said to have followed the completion of that 
work. The date-formula for one of his years of rule 
takes its title from the cutting of a new canal which he 

1 Cf. Statue B, col. VII., 11. 49-54. 

2 See De Sarzec, " Dec. en Chaldee," pi. 8 bis, Fig. 1, and Heuzey, " Cata- 
logue," pp. 300 ff. 

3 See above, p. 47, Fig. 12. 

4 See Ileuzey, " Rev. d'Assyr.," V., p. 135 ; " Dec. en Chald^e," p. 203 f. 


named Ningirsu-ushiimgal, and there is no doubt tliat 
he kept the elaborate system of irrigation, by which 
Lagash and her territories were supphed with water, in 
a perfect state of repair. Evidence of the plentiful 
supplies which the temple-lands produced may be seen 
in the increase of the regular offerings decreed by 
Gudea. On New Year's day, for instance, at the feast 
of Ban, after he had rebuilt her temple, he added to the 
marriage-gifts which were her due, consisting of oxen, 
sheep, lambs, baskets of dates, pots of butter, figs, cakes, 
birds, fish, and precious woods, etc. He also records 
special offerings of clothing and wool which he made to 
her, and of sacrificial beasts to Ningirsu and the goddess 
Nina. For the new temple 
of Gatumdug he mentions 
the gift of herds of cattle and 
flocks of sheep, together with 
their herdsmen and shepherds, 
and of irrigation-oxen and 
their keepers for the sacred 
lands of E-ninnCi. Such refer- 
ences point to an increase in 
the revenues of the state, and 
we may infer that the people ^^g- 67. 

of Lagash shared the pro- Mace-head of breccia, from a 

•infritv nf fhf\r n-ited ynrl Qio'iotain near the "Upper Sea" 
Spenty OI ineir pateSl ana ^^ Mediterranean, dedicated to 

his priesthood. Ningirsu by Gudea. 

While Gudea devoted [D^c.pi. 25 6is.rig.i.] 

himself to the service of his 

gods, he does not appear to have enriched the temples 
at the expense of the common people. He was a strict 
upholder of traditional privileges, such as the freedom 
from taxation enjoyed by Gu-edin, Ningirsu 's sacred 
plain ; but he did not countenance any acts of extortion 
on the part of his secular or sacred officials. That 
Gudea's ideal of government was one of order, law, and 
justice, and the protection of the weak, is shown by his 
description of the state of Lagash during the seven days 
he feasted with his people after the consecration of 
E-ninnu. He tells us that during this privileged time 
the maid was the equal of her mistress, and master and 
slave consorted together as friends ; the poH'erful and 


tlie luimble man lay down side by side, and in place of 
evil speech only propitious words were heard ; the laws 
of Nina and Ningirsii were observed, and the rich man 
did not wrong the orphan, nor did the strong man 
oppress the widow. This reference to what was ap- 
parently a legal code, sanctioned by the authority of the 
city-god and of a goddess connected with the ancient 
shrine of Eridu, is of considerable interest. It recalls 
the reforms of the ill-fiited Urukagina, who attempted 
to stamp out the abuses of his time by the introduction 
of similar legislation.^ Gudea lived in a happier age, 
and he appears to us, not as a reformer, but as the 
strong upholder of the laws in force. 

That the reign of Gudea was regarded by the suc- 
ceeding generations in Lagash as the golden age of their 
city may perhaps be inferred from his deification under 
the last kings of the Dynasty of Ur. There is no 
evidence that, Hke Sar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin, he 
assumed divine honours during his own lifetime, for in 
his inscriptions his name is never preceded by the de- 
terminative of di^ inity, and it also occurs \\dthout the 
divine prefix upon the seals of Gimdunpae, his wife, 
and of Lugal-me, his scribe. In the later period his 
statues were doubtless worshipped, and it has been sug- 
gested that the perpetual offerings of drink and food and 
grain, which he decreed in connection with one of them,^ 
prove that it was assimilated from the first to that of a 
god.^ But the names of his statues suggest that they 
were purely votive in character, and were not placed in 
the temples in consequence of any claim to divinity 
on Gudea's part. 

It was the custom of the Siunerian patesis to give 
long and symbolical names to statues, stelae and other 
sacred objects which they dedicated to the gods, and 
Gudea's statues do not form an exception to this rule. 
Thus, before he introduced the statue with the offerings 
into E-ninnu, he solenmly named it " For-my-king- 
have-I-built-this-temple-may-life-be-my-reward ! " A 
smaller statue for E-ninnu was named " [The-Shepherd]- 
who-loveth-his-king-am-I-may-my-life-be-prolonged 1 ", 

* See above, pp. 178 ff. - See Statue 15, col. I. 

3 Cf. Scheil, " Ilec. tie trav./' \ol. XVIII., p. G4. 






y. - 
- <■ £ 
y ' 5- 

r. '. O ^■ 

r S 5 5' 
- 1^ :? 


1: -^ p 

'• = o ° 

- n 5. 

_ 7 — -n 

- _-H -o 
r~ — < ^ 

?0 i 2 

X ii: - r 

- oi i- • 

^ d S^ eq 

/T li C 

^ w f- 

■" Z =^ 

O - jr 

2: z _ 

- lii 


while to the colossal statue for the same temple lie gave 
the title " Ningirsu-the-king-whosc-weighty-strenf»th,- 
unto-Gudea-the-builder-of- the- temple." The small 
standing statue for the temple of Ninkharsag bore the 
equally long name " May-Nintud {i.e. Xinkharsag)-the- 
mother-of-the-gods - the - arbiter - of- destinies - in - heaven - 
and -upon -earth -prolong -the -life -of- Gudea- who -hath - 
built-the-temple ! ", and another small statue for the 
temple of Bau was named " The-lady-the-beloved- 
-Esilsirsir-hath-given-Gudea-life." The statue for the 
temple of Ningishzida was named " To-Gudea-the- 
builder-of-the-temple-hath-life-been-given," and that for 
E-anna bore the title " Of-Gudea-the-man-who-hath- 
constructed-the-temple-may-the-life-be-prolonged ! " It 
will be seen that these names either assert that life and 
happiness have been granted to Gudea, or they invoke 
the deity addressed to prolong his life. In fact, they 
prove that the statues were originally placed in the 
temples like other votive objects, either in gratitude for 
past help, or to ensure a continuance of the divine favour. 

Such evidence as we possess would seem to show 
that at the time of Gudea no Sumerian ruler had ever 
laid claim to divine rank. It is true that offerings were 
made in connection with the statue of Ur-Nina during 
Lugal-anda's reign, ^ but Ur-Nina had never laid claim 
to divinity himself. Moreover, other high personages 
treated their own statues in the same way. Thus 
Shagshag, the wife of Urukagina, made olierings in 
connection with her own statue, but there is no evidence 
that she was deified. In fact, during the earlier periods, 
and also in Gudea's own reign, the statue was probably 
intended to represent the worshipper vicariously before 
his god.'^ Not only in his lifetime, but also after death, 
the statue continued to plead for him. The offerings 
were not originally made to the statue itself, but were 
probably placed near it to represent symbolically the 
owner's offerings to his god. 

This custom may have prepared the way for the 

^ See above, p. 169. 

* Of. Genouillac, " Tabl. sum. arch.," p. Ivi. f. 


practice of deification, but it did not originate in it. 
Indeed, the later development is first found among the 
Semitic kings of Akkad, and probably of Kish, but it 
did not travel southward until after the Dynasty of Ur 
had been established for more than a generation. Ur- 
Engur, like Gudea, was not deified in his own lifetime, 
and the innovation was only introduced by Dungi. 
Din-ing the reigns of the last kings of that dynasty the 
practice had been regularly adopted, and it was in this 
period that Gudea was deified and his cult established 
in Lagash along with those of Dungi and his con- 
temporary Ur-Lama I.^ By decreeing that offerings 
should be made to one of his statues, Gudea no doubt 
prepared the way for his posthumous deification, but he 
does not appear to have advanced the claim himself. 
That he should have been accorded this honour after 
death may be regarded as an indication that the 
splendour of his reign had not been forgotten. 

Gudea was succeeded upon the throne of Lagash 
by his son Ur-Ningirsu, and with this patesi we may 
probably establish a point of contact between the rulers 
of Lagash and those of Ur. That he succeeded his 
father there can be no doubt, for on a ceremonial 
mace-liead, which he dedicated to Ningirsu, and in 
other inscriptions we possess, he styles himself the 
son of Gudea and also patesi of Lagash. During his 
reign he repaired and rebuilt at least a portion of 
E-ninnu, for the British JNluseum possesses a gate- 
socket from this temple, and a few of his bricks have 
been found at Tello recording tliat he rebuilt in cedar- 
wood the Gigunu, a portion of the temple of Ningirsu, 
which Gudea had erected as symbolical of the Lower 
World. -^ JNIoreover, tablets have been found at Tello 
which are dated in his reign, and from these we gather 
that he was patesi for at least three years, and probably 
longer. From other monuments we learn that a highly 
placed religious oiHcial of Lagash, who was a con- 
temporary of Dungi, also bore the name of Ur-Ningirsu, 
and the pohit to be decided is whether we may identify 
this personage with Gudea's son. 

» See further, Chap. X., pj). 288, 298 f. 

2 SeeThureau-Dangiu, "'Zeits. fur Assyr./' XVIII., p. 132. 



Ih-it. Mils.. Xo. (f-.Z^Q: />/i,>to. hy .Mi-ssr.<:. .Vniisill &^ Co. 


Ur-Ning^irsu, tlie official, was lii^h-priest of the 
goddess Xiiia, and lie also held the offices of priest of 
Enki and hioh-priest of ^\nu. Moreover, he was a 
man of sufficient importance to stamp his name u})on 
bricks which were probably used in the construction 
of a temple at Lagash.^ That he was Dungi's con- 
temporary is known from an inscription upon a votive 
wig and head-dress in the British JMuseum, which is 
made of diorite and was intended for a female statuette." 
The text engraved upon this object states that it was 
made by a certain Bau-ninam for his lady and diAine 
protectress, who was probably the goddess Bau, as an 
adornment for her gracious person, and his object in 
presenting the offering was to induce her to prolong 
the fife of Dungi, " the mighty man, the King of Ur." 
The important part of the text concerns J5au-ninam's 
description of himself as a craftsman, or subordinate 
official, in the service of Ur-Ningirsu, " the beloved 
high-priest of Nina." From this passage it is clear that 
Ur-Ningirsu was high-priest in Lagash at a period 
when Dungi, king of Ur, exercised suzerainty over that 
city. If therefore we are to identify him with Gudea's 
son and successor, we must conclude that he had mean- 
while been deposed from the patesiate of Eagash, and 
appointed to the priestly offices which we find him 
holding during Dungi's reign. 

The alternative suggestion that Ur-Ningirsu may 
have fulfilled his sacerdotal duties during the lifetime 
of Gudea while he himself was still crown-prince,^ is 
negatived by the subsequent discovery that during the 
reign of Dungi's father, Ur-Engur, another patesi, 
named Ur-abba, was on the throne of Lagash ; for 
tablets have been found at 'I'ello which are dated in 
the reign of Ur-Engur and also in the patesiate of Ur- 
abba.^ To reconcile this new factor witii the preceding 
identification, we must suppose that Ur-Ningirsu's 

' See " Dec. en Cbaldee/' pi. .37, No. 8. A comparison of tlii.s brick with 
one of Ur-Ningirsu, the patesi (see No. 9 on the same plate), will show the 
similarity in the forms of the characters employed. 

^ See the plate opposite p. 200. 

•^ Cf. Winckler, "^ Untersuchungen zur altorientalischeu Geschichte," 
p. 42. 

* See Thureau-Daugin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. V., p. 7. 


deposition occurred in the reign of Ur-Engur, who 
appointed Ur-abba as patesi in liis place. According 
to this view, Ur-Ningirsu was not completely stripped 
of honours, but his authority was restricted to the 
purely religious sphere, and he continued to enjoy his 
priestly appointments during the early part of Dungi's 
reign. There is nothing impossible in this arrangement, 
and it finds support in account-tablets from Tello, which 
belong to the period of Ur-Ningirsu's reign. Some of 
the tablets mention supplies and give lists of precious 
objects, which were destined for " the king," " the 
queen," " the king's son," or " the king's daughter," 
and were received on their behalf by the palace-cham- 
berlain.^ Although none of these tablets expressly 
mention Ur-Ningirsu, one of the same group of docu- 
ments was drawn up in the year Avhich followed his 
accession as patesi, another is dated in a later year of 
his patesiate, and all may be assigned with some con- 
fidence to his period.^ The references to a " king " in 
the official account-lists point to the existence of a 
royal dynasty, whose authority was recognized at this 
time in Lagash. In view of the evidence afforded by 
Bau-ninam's dedication we may identify the dynasty 
with that of Ur. 

The acceptance of the synchronism carries with it 
the corollary that with Ur-Ningirsu's reign we have 
reached another turning point in the history, not only 
of Lagash, but of the whole of Sumer and Akkad. It 
is possible that Ur-Engur may have founded his dynasty 
in Ur before Gudea's death, but there is no evidence 
that he succeeded in forcing his authority upon Lagash 
during Gudea's patesiate ; and, in view of the compara- 
tive shortness of his reign, it is preferable to assign his 
accession to the period of Gudea's son. Sumer must 
have soon acknowledged his authority, and Lagash and 
the other southern cities doubtless formed the nucleus 
of the kingdom on which lie based his claim to the 
hegemony in Babylonia. This claim on behalf of Ur 

' See Thureau-Daiigiii, op. cif., p. 70, and "Kec. de tabl./' p. v. 

* One of the tablets of the ffroup is dated by the construction of the 
temple of Ningirsu ; this need not be referred to Gudea's building of 
E-ninnu, but rather to Ur-Ningirsu's work upon the temple, or even to a 
later reconstruction. 


was not fully substantiated until the reign of Dungi, 
but in Sumer Ur-Engur appears to have met witli 
little opposition. Of the circumstances which led to 
Ur-Ningirsu's deposition we know nothing, but we may 
conjecture that his acknowledgment of Ur-Engur's 
authority was not accompanied by the full measure of 
support demanded by his suzerain. As Gudea's son 
and successor he may well have resented the loss of 
practical autonomy which his city had enjoyed, and 
Ur-Engin- may in consequence have found it necessary 
to remove him from the patesiate. Ur-abba and his 
successors were merely vassals of the kings of Ur, and 
Lagash became a provincial city in the kingdom of 
Sumer and Akkad. 




THE more recent finds at Telle have en;ibled us to 
bridge the gap which formerly existed in our 
knowledge of Chaldean history and civilization 
between the age of Naram-Sin and the rise of the city 
of Ur under Ur-Engur, the founder of the kingdom of 
Sumer and Akkad. What we now know of Lagash 
during this period may probably be regarded as typical 
of the condition of the other great Sumerian cities. 
The system of government, by means of which Shar- 
Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin had exercised control over 
Sumer from their capital in the north, had doubtless been 
maintained for a time by their successors ; but, from the 
absence of any trace of their influence at Tello, we can- 
not regard their organization as having been equally 
effective. They, or the Semitic kings of some other 
nortliern city, may have continued to exercise a general 
suzerainty over the whole of Babylonia, but the records 
of Lagash seem to show that the larger and more distant 
cities were left in the enjoyment of practical indepen- 
dence. The mere existence of a suzerain, however, who 
had inlierited the throne or empire of Shar-Gani-sharri 
and Naram-Sin, must have acted as a deterrent influence 
upon any ambitious prince or patesi, and would thus 
have tended to maintain a condition of equilibrium 
between the separate states of which that empire had 
been composed. We have seen that Lagash took 
advantage of this time of comparative inactivity to 
develop her resources along peaceful lines. Slie gladly 
returned to the condition of a compact city-state, with- 
out dropping the intercourse with distant countries 



which had been estabUshed under the earher Akkadian 

During this period we may suppose that tlie city of 
Ur enjoyed a similar measure of independence, whicli 
increased in proportion to the dcchne of Semitic 
authority in the north. Gudea's campaign against 
Anshan affords some indication of the capabihty of 
independent action, to which tlie southern cities gradu- 
ally attained. It is not likely that such initiative on 
the part of Lagash was unaccompanied by a like 
activity within the neighbouring, and more powerful, 
state of Ur. In an earlier age the twin kingdoms of 
Ur and Erech had dominated southern Babylonia, and 
their rulers had established the kingdom of Sumer, 
which took an active part in opposing the advance of 
Semitic influence southwards. The subjection of Sumer 
by the Dynasty of Akkad put an end for a time to all 
thoughts of independence on the part of separate cities, 
although the expedition against Erech and Naksu, 
which occurred in the patesiate of Lugal-ushumgal, 
supports the tradition of a revolt of all the lands in the 
latter part of Sargon's reign. Ur would doubtless have 
been ready to lend assistance to such a movement, and 
we may imagine that she was not slow to take advan- 
tage of the gradual weakening of Akkad under her 
later rulers. At a time when Gudea was marching 
across the Elamite border, or sending unchecked for 
his supplies to the ISIediterranean coast or the islands of 
the Persian Gulf, Ur was doubtless organizing her own 
forces, and may possibly have already made tentative 
efforts at forming a coahtion of neighbouring states. 
She only needed an energetic leader, and this she found 
in Ur-Engur, who succeeded in uniting the scattered 
energies of Sumer and so paved the way for the more 
important victories of his son. 

That Ur-Engur was the founder of his dynasty we 
know definitely from the dynastic chronicle, which was 
recovered during the American excavations at Nippur/ 
In this document he is given as the first king of the 
Dynasty of Ur, the text merely stating that he became 
king and ruled for eighteen years. Unfortunately the 

» See Hilprecht, " Math., Met., and Cliron. Tablets," p. 46 f. 


preceding columns of the text are wanting, and we do 
not know what dynasty was set down in the Hst as pre- 
ceding that of Or, nor is any indication afforded of 
the circumstances which led to Ur-Engur's accession. 
From his building-inscriptions that have been recovered 
on different sites in Southern Babylonia ^ it is possible, 
however, to gather some idea of his achievements and 
the extent of his authority. After securing the throne 
he appears to have directed his attention to putting the 
affairs of Ur in order. In two of his brick-inscriptions 
from JNIukayyar, Ur-Engur bears the single title " king 
of Ur," and these may therefore be assigned to the 
beginning of his reign, when his kingdom did not extend 
beyond the limits of his native city. These texts record 
the rebuilding of the temple of Nannar, the Moon-god, 
and the repair and extension of the city-wall of Ur.- 
His work on the temple of the city-god no doubt won for 
him the support of the priesthood, and so strengthened 
his hold upon the throne ; while, by rebuilding and 
adding to the fortifications of Ur, he secured his city 
against attack before he embarked upon a policy of 

We may assume with some confidence that the first 
city over which he extended his authority was Erech. 
It would necessarily have been his first objective, for by 
its position it would have blocked any northward 
advance. The importance attached by Ur-Engur to 
the occupation of this city is reflected in the title " Lord 
of Erech," which precedes his usual titles upon bricks 
from the temple of the Moon-god at Ur, dating from a 
later period of his reign ; his assumption of the title 
indicates that Erech was closely associated with Ur, 
though not on a footing of equality. That he should 
have rebuilt E-anna, the great temple of Ninni in Erech, 
as we learn from bricks found at Warka, was a natural 
consequence of its acquisition, for by so doing he 
exercised his pri\ilege as suzerain. But he honoured 
tlie city above others which he acquired, by installing 
his own son there as high priest of the goddess Ninni, 

> See Thureau-Dau^nn, " Koniggiiischriften," pp. 186 ff. 
2 The rebuilding of tlie wall of Ur was also commemorated in the date- 
formula for one of the early years of l)is reign. 




J'roiii U'nrka: Brit. Mvs., No. qcoii ; fhoto. by Messrs. Mansell <Sr= Co. 


an event which gave its oflicial title to one of the years 
of his reign. We have definite evidence that he also 
lield the neighbouring city of Larsa, for bricks have 
been found at Scnkcra, which record his rebuilding of 
the temple of Babbar, the Sun-god. With the ac([uisi- 
tion of Lagash, lie was doubtless strong enough to 
obtain the recognition of his authority throughout the 
whole of Sumer. 

The only other city, in which direct evidence has 
been found of Ur-Engur's building activity, is Ni})pur. 
From the American excavations on that site we learn 
that he rebuilt E kur, Enlil's great temple, and also that 
of Xinlil, his spouse. It was doubtless on the strength 
of his holding Ni})pur that he assumed the title of 
King of Sumer and Akkad. How far his authority was 
recognized in Akkad it is impossible to say, but the 
necessity for the conquest of Babylon in Dungi's reign 
would seem to imply that Ur-Engur's suzerainty over 
at least a part of the country was more or less nominal. 
Khashkhamer, patesi of Ishkun-Sin, whose seal is now 
preserved in the British Museum, ' was his subject, and 
the Semitic character of the name of his city suggests 
that it lay in Northern Babylonia. Moreover, certain 
tablets drawn up in his reign are dated in " the year in 
which King Ur-Engur took his way from the lower to 
the upper country," a phrase that may possibly imply a 
military expedition in the north. Thus some portions 
of Akkad may have been effectively held by Ur-Engur, 
but it is certain that the complete subjugation of the 
country was only effected during Dungi's reign. 

In Sumer, on the other hand, Ur-Engur's sway was 
unquestioned. His appointment of Ur-abba as patesi 
of Lagash was probably characteristic of his treatment 
of the southern cities : by the substitution of his own 
adherents in place of tlie reigning patesis, he woiild 
have secured loyal support in the administration of his 
dependent states. We have evidence of one of his 
administrative acts, so far as Lagash is concerned. On 
a clay cone from Tello he records that, after he had 
built the temple of Enlil, he dug a canal in honour of 
the Moon-god, Nannar, which he named Nannar-gugal. 

* See the plate opposite p. 246. 


He describes the canal as a boundary-ditch, and we 
may conjecture that it marked a revision of the frontier 
between the territories of two cities, possibly that 
between Lagasli and lands belonging to the city of Ur. 
In the same inscription he tells us that, in accordance 
with the laws of the Sun-god, he caused justice to 
prevail, a claim that affords some indication of the 
spirit in which he governed the cities he had incorporated 
in his kingdom. 

In the reign of Dungi, who succeeded his father 
upon the throne and inherited from him the kingdom 
of Sumer and Akkad, the whole of Northern Babylonia 
was brought to acknowledge the suzerainty of Ur. 
Considerable light has been thrown upon Dungi's policy, 
and indirectly upon that of the whole of Ur-Engur's 
dynasty, by the recently published chronicle concerning 
early Babylonian kings, to which reference has already 
been made. The earlier sections of this document, 
dealing ^\dth the reigns of Sargon and Naram-Sin, are 
followed by a short account of Dungi's reign, from 
which we learn two facts of considerable significance.^ 
Tlie first of these is that Dungi " cared greatly for 
the city of Eridu, which was on the shore of the sea," 
and the second is that " he sought after evil, and the 
treasure of E-sagila and of Babylon he brought out as 
spoil." It will be noted that the writer of the chronicle, 
who was probably a priest in the temple of E-sagila, 
disapproved of his treatment of Babylon, in conse- 
quence of which he states that Bel {i.e. Marduk) made 
an end of him. In view of the fact that Dungi reigned 
for no less than fifty-eight years and consolidated an 
extensive empire, it is not improbable that the evil 
fate ascribed to him in the chronicle was suggested 
by Babylonian prejudice. But the Babylonian colour- 
ing of the narrative does not affect the historical value 
of the other traditions, but rather enhances them. For 
it is obvious that the disaster to the city and to E-sagila 
was not an invention, and must, on the contrary, have 
been of some magnitude for its record— to-4iave been 
preserved in Babylon itself through later generations. 

' See King, "Chronicles concerning early Babylonian Kings," Vol. I., 
pp. 60 ff. ; Vol. II., p. 11. 


In Diinsfi's treatment of l^abylon, and in his pro- 
fanation of the temple of its city-god, we have striking- 
proof that the rise of the Dynasty of Ur was accom- 
panied by a religious as well as a political revolution. 
Late tradition retained the memory of Sargon's build- 
ing activity in Babylon, and under his successors upon 
the throne of Akkad the great temple of E-sagila may 
well have become the most important shrine in Northern 
Babylonia and the centre of Semitic worship. Eridu, 
on the other hand, was situated in the extreme south 
of Sumer and contained the oldest and most venerated 
temple of the Sumerians. Dungi's care for the latter 
city to the detriment of Babylon, emphasized by con- 
trast in the late records of his reign, suggests that he 
aimed at a complete reversal of the conditions which 
had prevailed during the preceding age. The time 
was ripe for a Sumerian reaction, and Ur-Engur's 
initial success in welding the southern cities into a 
confederation of states under his own suzerainty may 
be traced to the beginning of this racial nio\ement. 
Dungi continued and extended his father's policy, and 
his sack of Babylon may probably be regarded as tlie 
decisive blow in the struggle, which had been taking 
place against the last centres of Semitic influence in 
the north. 

Other evidence is not lacking of the Sumerian 
national revival, which characterized the period of the 
kings of Sumer and Akkad. Of Ur-Engur's inscrip- 
tions every one is written in Sumerian, in striking 
contrast to the texts whicli date from the time of 
Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin. Of the still more 
numerous records of Dungi's reign, only two short 
votive formulae are written in Semitic Babylonian, and 
one of these is from the northern city of Cutha. 
The predominant use of Sumerian also characterizes 
the texts of the remaining members of Ur-Engur's 
dynasty and the few inscriptions of the Dynasty of 
Isin that have been recovered.^ In fact, only one of 

' The same characteristics were probably presented by the votive texts of 
local patesis, who were contemporary with the kiags of Sumer and Akkad. 
Tlius Khaladda, patesi of Shuruppak, and the son of Dada who was patesi 
before him, records in Sumerian his building of the great door of the god or 
goddess of that city ; see his cone-inscription found at Fara and published in 


these is in Semitic, a short brick-inseription giving 
the name and titles of Gimil-Sin, which was found at 
Susa. It is true that the last three kings of the 
Dynasty of Ur apparently bear Semitic names, and 
of the rulers of the Dynasty of Isin the Semitic 
character of tlie majority of the names is not in doubt. 
But this in itself docs not prove that their bearers 
were Semites, and a study of the proper names occur- 
ring in the numerous commercial documents and tablets 
of accounts, which were drawn up under the kings of 
Ur and Isin, are invariably Sumerian in character.^ 
A more convincing test than that of the royal names 
is afforded by the cylinder-seals of the period. In 
these botli subject and treatment are Sumerian, re- 
sembling the seals of Lagash at the time of Gudea 
and having little in common with those of the Dynasty 
of Akkad. ^loreover, the worshippers engraved upon 
the seals are Sumerians, not Semites. Two striking 
examples are the seal of Khashkhamer, the contem- 
porary and dependant of Ur-Engur, and that which 
Kilulla - guzala,'^ the son of Ur - baga, dedicated to 
Meslamtaea for the preservation of Dungi's life.^ It 
will be noticed that on each of these seals the wor- 
shipper has a shaven head and wears the fringed 
Sumerian tunic. There can be little doubt, therefore, 
that Ur-Engur and his descendants were Sumerians, 
and we may probably regard the Dynasty of Isin as 
a continuation of the same racial movement which led to 
the establishment of the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad.* 

the "Mitteil. der Deutsdi. Orieiit-Gesellschaft," No. 16, 1902-3, p. 13. On 
the other hand, Semitic influence is visible in the inscription of Itiir-Shamash 
a high official (rabianu), who built at Kisurra and on an inscribed brick found 
at Abu Hatab styles himself the son of Idin-ilu, patesi of Kisurra (op. cit., 
No. 15, 1002, p. 13). 

1 See Iluber, " Die Pcrsonenuamen . . . aus der Zeit der Konige von Ur 
und Nisin," and Langdon, "Zeits. der Deutsch. Morgenland. Gesellschaft,'' 
Bd. LXII., p. 399. 

2 Or better, " Kilulla, the guzalii '' ; cf. " Konigsinschriften," p. 194 f. 
^ See tlie plate opposite p. 24(!. 

* In spite of the use of Sumerian for their inscriptions and the continuance 
of the traditions of l.r, Meyer suggests that the Dynasty of Isin may have 
been of Amorite origin (cf. "Geschichte des Altertums," Bd. J., lift. II., 
p. 501 f.). But the presence of the name of the god Dagan in two of the 
royal names is scarcely sufficient to justify this view, especially as the 
suggested Amorite invasion in Libit-Ishtar's reign has been to all intents and 
purposes disproved ; see below, p. 315 f. 



Besides affording information with regard to the 
racial characteristics of the inhabitants of Southern 
Babylonia, the official lists and commercial documents 
of this period indirectly throw light upon historical 
events. In the first great collection of tablets found 
by jNI. de Sarzec at Tello, the majority of those belong- 
ing to Dungi's period were dated in the later years 
of his reign ; but among the tablets recovered during 
the more recent diggings on the site are many dated 
in his earlier years. The date-formula? inscribed upon 
these documents, in conjunction with fragmentary date- 
lists, have rendered it possible to arrange the titles of 
the years in order for the greater part of his reign ; 
and, since the years were named after important occur- 
rences, such as the building or inauguration of temples 
in different cities and the successful prosecution of 
foreign campaigns, they form a valuable source of 
information concerning the history of the period.' 
From these we can gather some idea of tlie steps by 
which Dungi increased his empire, and of the periods 
in his reign during which he achieved his principal 
conquests. During his earlier years it would seem 
that he was occupied in securing complete control 
within the districts of Northern Babylonia, which he 
had nominally inherited from his father. The sack of 
Babylon may well lune been commemorated in the 
title for the year in which it took place, and, if so, 
it must be placed within the first decade of his reign, 
where a gap occurs in our sequence of the date-formula?. 
Such of the earlier titles as have been recovered refer 
for the most part to the building of palaces and temples, 
the installation of deities within their shrines, and the 
like. It is not until the thirty-fourth year of his reign 
that a foreign conquest is explicitly recorded. 

But before tliis period tliere are indications that an 
expansion of Dungi's empire was already taking place. 
In the nineteenth year of his reign he installed the god- 
dess Kadi in her temple at Der, an act which proves that 
the principal frontier town on the Elamite border was at 
this time in his possession. In the following year he 

1 See Thureau-Dangin, '' Comptes rendus," 1902, pp. 77 ff., " itev. 
d'Assyr./' Vol. V., pp. 67 ff., and " Kciuigsinschriften/' pp. 229 ff. 


installed in his temple the god Nutiigmushda of Kazallu, 
in which we may see evidence that he had imposed his 
suzerainty over this country, the conquest of which, 
according to the late tradition, had been a notable 
achievement of Sargon's reign. In his twenty-sixth year 
he appointed his daughter to be " lady " of the Elamite 
region of JNIarkharshi, a record that throws an interest- 
ing liglit upon the position enjoyed by women among 
the Sumerians. These districts, and others of which we 
have no knowledge, may well have been won by conquest, 
for it is obvious that the official date-formulee could not 
take account of every military expedition, especially in 
years when an important religious event had also taken 
place. But, in the case of the three countries referred 
to, it is also possible that httle opposition was offered to 
their annexation, and for that reason the title of the 
year may have merely recorded Dungi's performance of 
his chief privilege as suzerain, or the appointment of 
his representative as ruler. Whichever explanation be 
adopted, it is clear that Dungi was already gaining 
possession of regions which had formed part of the 
empire of the Semitic kings of Akkad. 

In addition to acquiring their territory, Dungi also 
seems to have borrowed from the Semites one of their 
most effective weapons, for the twenty-eighth year of 
his reign was knov/n as that in which he enrolled the 
sons of Ur as archers. The principal weapon of the 
earlier Sumerians w^as the spear, and they delivered 
their attack in close formation, the spearmen being 
protected in line of battle by heavy shields carried by 
shield-bearers. For other purposes of offence they 
depended chiefly on the battle-axe and possibly the 
dart, but these were subsidiary weapons, fitted rather 
for the pursuit of a flying enemy Avhcn once their main 
attack liad been delivered. Eannatum's victories testify 
to the success achieved by the method of attack in 
heavy phalanx against an enemy with inferior arms. 
The bow appears to have been introduced by the 
Semites, and they may have owed their success in 
battle largely to its employment : it would have enabled 
them to break up and demoralize the serried ranks of 
the Sumerians, before they could get to close quarters. 


Dungi doubtless recognized the advantage the weapon 
would give his own forces, especially w^hen figliting in 
a hilly country, where the heavy spear and shield would 
be of little service, and it would be difficult to retain a 
close formation. We may conjecture that he found his 
companies of bowmen of considerable assistance in the 
series of successful campaigns, which he carried out in 
Elam and the neighbouring regions, during the latter 
half of his reign. 

Of these campaigns we know that the first conquest of 
Gankhar took place inDungi's thirty-fourth year, and that 
of Simuru in the year that followed. The latter district 
does not appear to have submitted tamely to annexation, 
for in his thirty-sixth year Dungi found it necessary to 
send a fresh expedition for its reconquest. In the follow- 
ing year he foUow^ed up these successes by tlie conquest 
of Kharshi and Khumurti. Gankhar and Simuru were 
probably situated in the mountainous districts to the 
east of tlie Tigris, around the upper course of the Diyala, 
in the neighbourhood of Lulubu ; for the four countries 
Urbillu, Simuru, Lulubu, and Gankhar formed the 
object of a single expedition undertaken by Dungi in 
his fifty-fifth year.^ Kharshi, or Kharishi, appears to 
ha\e also lain in the region to the east of the Tigris.^ 
These victories doubtless led to the submission of other 
districts, for in his fortieth year Dungi married one of 
his daughters to the patesi of Anshan, among the most 
important of Elamite states. The warlike character of 
the Elamites is attested by the difficulty Dungi ex- 
perienced in retaining control over these districts, after 
they had been incorporated in his empire. For in the 
forty-first year of his reign he was obliged to undertake 
the reconquest of Gankhar, and to send a tliird expedi- 
tion there two years later ; in tlie forty-third year 
he subdued Simuru for the third time, while in the 

' Cf. Thureau-Dan^in, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit./' 1898, col. ICO, n. 2, ami 
"' Coinptes rendus," 1902, p. 85. 

2 It may perhaps be connected witli Khursliitu (cf. Meyer, "Gescliicbte 
des Altertums," Bd. I., Hft. II., p. 498 f.), the site of which is indicated by 
the brick from the palace of Pukhia, King of Khurshitu, which was found 
at Tuz-Khurmati on the river Adhem (cf. Scheil, " Kec. de trav.," XVI., 
p. 186 ; XIX., p. 61). Pukhia was probably contemporary with the earliest 
rulers of Ashur. 


forty-fourth year Ansluin itself revolted and had to be 
regained by force of arms. 

In the course of these ten years it is probable that 
Dungi annexed the greater part of Elam, and placed his 
empire upon an enduring basis. It is true that during 
the closing years of his reign lie undertook a fresh series 
of expeditions, conquering Shashru in the fifty-second 
year, subduing Simuru and Lulubu in the fifty-fourth 
year " for the ninth time," and Urbillu, Kimash, 
Khumurti and Kharshi in the course of his last four 
years. But the earlier victories, by means of which he 
extended his sway far beyond the borders of Sumer and 
Akkad, may be held to mark the principal era of expan- 
sion in the growth of his empire. It was probably 
during this period that he added to his other titles 
the more comprehensive one of " king of the four 
quarters (of the world)," thus reviving a title which had 
already been adopted by Naram-Sin at a time when the 
empire of Akkad had reached its zenith. Another 
innovation which Dungi introduced in the course of his 
reign, at a period it would seem shortly before his 
adoption of Naram-Sin's title, was the assumption of 
divine rank, indicated by the addition of the determina- 
tive for divinity before his name. Like Naram-Sin, 
who had claimed to be the god of Akkad, he styled 
himself the god of his land, and he foimded temples in 
which his statue became the object of a public cult. 
He also established a national festival in his own honour, 
and renamed the seventh month of the year, during 
which it was celebrated, as the Month of the Feast of 
Dungi. He appears to have been the first Sumerian 
ruler to claim divine honours. By so doing he doubt- 
less challenged comparison with the kings of Akkad, 
whose em])ire his conquests had enabled him to rival. 

Dungi's administration of the Elamite provinces of 
his empire appears to have been of a far more perma- 
nent character than tliat established by any earlier 
conqueror from Babylonia. In the course of this 
history we have frequently noted occasions on which 
Elam has come into contact with the centres of civili- 
zation in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates. In 
fact, from her geographical position, she was not only the 






fir/f. Jfus., A'os. 90897, 90S98, n«ii'9ioi4. 


' ' , •' ■ 

' / r 

» 1 

' T 1 






l<rtf. .\fus.. Xt>s. 91081. 90899, and t)\oi2. 


nearest foreign neighbour of Siimer and Akkad, but 
she Avas bound to influence them and be influenced by 
them in turn. To the earher Sumerian rulers Elam 
was a name of terror, associated "with daring raids 
across the I'igris on the part of hardy mountain races. 
The Semitic kings of Kish had turned the tables by 
invading Elamite territory, and their conquests and 
those of the kings of Akkad had opened the way for 
the establishment of close commercial relations between 
the two countries. Although their expeditions may 
have been undertaken with the object of getting spoil 
rather than of acquiring territory, there is no doubt 
that they resulted in a considerable Semitic immigra- 
tion into the country. Moreover, the Semitic conquerors 
brought with them the civilization they had themselves 
acquired. For their memorial and monumental records 
the native princes of Elam adopted from their conquerors 
the cuneiform system of writing and even their Semitic 
language, though the earlier native writing continued 
to be employed for the ordinary purposes of life.^ 
Basha-Shushinak,^ patesi of Susa and governor of Elam, 
who may probably be placed at a rather earlier period 
than the Dynasty of Ur, employs the Semitic Babylo- 
nian language for recording his votive offerings, and he 
not only calls down Shushinak's vengeance upon the 
impious, but adds invocations to such purely Babylonian 
deities as Shamash, Xergal, Enlil, Enki or Ea, Sin, 
Xinni or Ishtar, and Ninkharsag. We could not have 
more striking evidence of the growth of Semitic 
influence in Elam during the period which followed 
the Elamite victories of the kings of Kish and Akkad. 

Close commercial relations were also maintaiiied 
between Elam and Sumer, and Gudca's conquest of 
Anshan may be regarded as the first step towards the 
Sumerian domination of the country. In establishing 
his own authority in Elam, Dungi must have found 
many districts, and especially the city of Susa, in- 
fluenced by Sumerian culture, though chiefly through 

1 See below. Chap. XII., p. 338. 

2 The name has also been read as Karibu-sha-Shushinak. He does not 
appear to have inherited his patesiate, for in his inscriptions he assigns no 
title to his father Shimbi-ishkhuk. 



the medium of Semitic immigrants from Northern 
l^iiby Ionia. His task of administering the conquered 
provijices was thus rendered proportionately easier. 
That his expeditions were not merely raids, but 
resulted in the permanent occupation of the country, 
is pro^ ed by a number of tablets found at 'J'ello, which 
throw considerable light upon the methods by which 
he administered the empire from his capital at Ur. 
Many of these documents contain orders for supplies 
allotted to officials in the king's service, who were 
passing through Lagash in the course of journeys 
between Ur and their districts in Elam. The tablets 
eniunerate quantities of grain, strong drink and oil, 
which had been assigned to them, either for their 
sustenance during their stay in Lagash, or as provision 
for their journey after their departure. 

It is interesting to note that the towns or countries, 
from which they came, or to which they set out on 
their return journey from Ur, are generally specified. 
In addition to Susa, we meet with the names of 
Anshan, Kharishi, Kimash and JMarkharshi, the con- 
quest or annexation of which by Dungi, as we have 
already seen, is recorded in the date-formulae. Other 
places, the officials of which are mentioned, wer^ 
Khukhnuri, Shimash, Sabu, Ulu, Urri, Zaula, Gisha, 
Siri, Siu, Nekhune, and Sigiresh. Like the pre- 
ceding districts, these were all in Elam, while Az, 
Shabara, Simashgi, INlakhar and Adamdun, with which 
other officers were connected, probably lay in the 
same region.^ From the number of separate places, the 
names of which have already been recovered on the 
tablets from Tello, it is clear that Dungi's authority 
in Elam was not confined to a few of the principal 
cities, but was effectively established throughout the 
greater part of the country. While much of hi^ 
administrative work was directed from Ur, it is probabl 
that Susa formed his local capital. From inscriptions 
found during the French excavations on that site we 
know that Dungi rebuilt there the temple of Shushinak 
the national god,'^ and it may be inferred that he made 

* See 'niureau-Danpin,," Comptes rendus," 1902, p. 88 f. 
2 bee Sciieilj '"Textes Elani.-Scniit.," HI., p. 20 f. 


the city his headquarters during his periods of residence 
in the country. 

The functions of many of the officials it is diflicult 
to determine, but some of the titles that can be 
explained include couriers and royal messengers, who 
were entrusted ^vith despatches. In the case of 
officials of a higher grade the object of their mission 
is sometimes indicated on the tablet, and it is seen tliat 
the majority superintended the collection and distribu- 
tion of supplies, the transport of building materials, 
and the provision of labour for the public works under- 
taken by the king. In fact, a very large nimiber of the 
royal officers were employed in recruiting public slaves 
in Elam, and in transporting them to Ur and other cities, 
for work upon temples and palaces in course of con- 
struction. From the situation of Lagash on the high- 
road between Ur and Susa, it is natural that the majority 
of the officials mentioned on the tablets should be on 
their way to or from Elam, but some whose business 
lay in other directions are occasionally mentioned. Thus 
certain of them were from towns in the immediate 
neighbourhood of Lagash, such as Tig-abba, while 
others journeyed northward to Nippur. Others, again, 
were on their way south to the coast, and even to the 
island of Dilmun in the Persian Gulf 

Among the higher officials whose stay in Lagash is 
recorded, or whose representatives passed through the 
city on business, a prefect, a local governor, and even 
a patesi are sometimes mentioned, and from this source 
of information we learn the names of some of the 
patesis who ruled in Susa under the suzerainty of 
Dungi and his successors on the throne of Ur. Thus 
several of the tablets record the supply of rations for 
Urkium, patesi of Susa, on his way back to that city 
during Dungi's reign. Another tablet mentions a 
servant of Zarik, patesi of Susa, who liad come from 
Nippur, while a third patesi of Susa, who owed allegi- 
ance to one of the later kings of Ur, was Beli-arik.^ It 

1 Cf. Scheil, '"^Rec. de trav.," Vol. XXII., p. 153. Khumiiiii, patesi of 
Kiraash and governor of Madka, whose seal in the Hermitage at St. 
Petersburg is published by Sayce (" Zeits. fiir Assyr./' \'I., p. Kil), is probaluy 
also to be set in this period. Madka is to be identified with Madga, w hence 
Gudea obtained bitumen ; see above, p. 261 f. 


is noteworthy that these names, like that of Lipum, 
patesi of Anshan, who is also mentioned, are not 
Elamite but Semitic Babylonian, while Ur-gigir and 
Nagidda, who were patesis of Adamdun during this 
period, are Sumerian. It is therefore clear that, on his 
conquest of Elam, Dungi deposed the native rulers and 
replaced them by officials from Babylonia, a practice 
conthiued by his successors on the throne. In this we 
may see conclusive evidence of the permanent and 
detailed control over the administration of the country, 
wliich was secured by the later kings of Ur. Such a 
policy no doubt resulted in a very effective system of 
government, but its success depended on the mainte- 
nance of a sufficient force to overawe any signs of 
opposition. That the Elamites themselves resented 
the foreign domination is clear from the number of 
military expeditions, which were required to stamp out 
rebellions and reconquer provinces in revolt. The 
harsh methods adopted by the conquerors were not 
calculated to secure any loyal acceptance of their rule 
on the part of the subject race, and to this cause we 
may probably trace the events which led not only to 
the Elamite revival but to the downfall of the Dynasty 
of Ur itself. 

It is clear that Elam under Dungi's administration 
formed a rich source of supply for those material 
products, in the lavish display of which the later rulers 
of Sumer loved to indulge. Her quarries, mines, and 
forests were laid under contribution, and her cities were 
despoiled of their accumulated wealth in the course 
of the numerous mihtary expeditions by which her 
provinces were overrun. From the spoil of his cam- 
paigns Dungi was enabled to enrich the temples of his 
own land, and by appropriating the products of the 
country he obtained an abundance of metal, stone and 
wood for the construction and adornment of his build- 
ings. I>.arge bodies of public slaves supplied the neces- 
sary labour, and their ranks were constantly recruited 
from among the captives taken in battle, and from 
towns and villages which were suspected of participa- 
tion in revolts. He was thus enabled to continue, on 
an even more elaborate scale, the rebuilding of the 



; -'-/-'At' 

L-dT "'' * 




fit-it. Mrts., A'os. 19024 anr/ 12231. 


^l^a^Mi* ■«• 'i * 'nrriiii 

1.,:..;, J ■ . ■/i.c^t-^^.. 


-OF UR. 

/>'•//, Afiis., A'os. 18957 and 18344. 


ancient temples of his country, wliicli luui hccri in- 
augurated by his fatlier, Ur-Ent>ur. 

.Vniong the cities of Akkad we know that at Cutha 
he rebuilt E-meslam, tlie great temple of Xergal, the 
city-god, but it is from Sunier tiiat the principal 
evidence of his building activity has come. The late 
tradition that he greatly favoured the city of Eridu is 
supported by a votive text in the British Museum, 
which records his restoration of Enid's temple in tliat 
city ; moreover, under Dungi, the chief priest of l^ridu 
enjoyed a position of great fovour and influence. 
Another city in the south, in which lie undertook large 
building-operations, was Erech ; here he restored E-anna, 
the temple of the goddess Ninni, and built a great wall, 
probably in connection with the city's system of defence. 
We know few details concerning the condition of these 
cities, but the wealth enjoyed by the temples of Lagash 
may be regarded as typical of the other great Sumerian 
religious centres during Dungi's reign. Among the 
baked clay tablets from Tello w'hich date from this 
period are extensive lists of cattle, sheep, and asses, 
owned by the temples, and detailed tablets of accounts 
concerning the administration of the rich temple lands. 
It is interesting to note that these documents, which 
from the nature of their clay and the beauty of their 
^vriting are among the finest specimens yet recovered 
in Babylonia,^ were found by M. de Sarzec in the 
original archive-chambers in which they had been stored 
by the Sumerrin priests. Though they had apparently 
been disturbed at some later period, the majority were 
still arranged in layers, placed one upon tlie other, upon 
benches of earth which ran along both sides of narrow 
subterranean galleries.^ 

In spite of Dungi's devotion to the ancient Sumerian 
cult of Enki in the south, he did not neglect Nippur, 
though he seems to have introduced some no\elties in 
the relations he maintained with this central shrine of 
Babylonia. In the fifteenth year of his reign he appears 
to have emphasized the political connection between 
Nippur and the capital, and six years later he dedicated 

* See the plate opposite p. 292. 

« Cf. Henzey, " Rev. d'Assyr.," HI., p. 66. 


a local sanctuary to the I\Iooii-god at the former city, 
in which he installed a statue of Nannar, the city-god 
of Ur. Enlil and liis consort Ninlil were not deposed 
from their place at the head of the Sumerian pantheon ; 
the Moon-god, as the patron deity of the suzerain city, 
was merely provided with a local centre of worship 
beside E-kur, the great temple of his father. Indeed, 
under Dungi's successors Enlil enjoyed a position of 
enhanced importance ; but it is possible tliat wdth 
Nannar the same process of evolution was at this time 
beginning to take place, which at a later period charac- 
terized the rise in importance of JNIarduk, the city-god 
of Babylon. But the short duration of the Dynasty of 
Ur did not give time for the development of the process 
beyond its initial stages. At Nippur Dungi also built 
a temple in honour of the goddess Damgalnunna, and 
we possess a cylinder-seal which Ur-nabbad,^ a patesi 
of Nippur, dedicated to Nusku, Enlil's chief minister, 
on behalf of Dungi's life. Ur-nabbad describes himself 
as the son of I^ugal-ezendug, to whom he also assigns 
the title of patesi of Nippur. It is probable that at 
Nippur the office of patesi continued to be hereditary, 
in spite of political changes, a privilege it doubtless 
enjoyed in virtue of its peculiarly sacred character. 

In his capital at Ur it was but natural that Dungi 
should still further enlarge the great temple which Ur- 
Engur had erected in honour of the Moon-god, and it 
was probably in Ur also that he built a temple in 
honour of Ninib, whose cult he particularly favoured. 
He also erected two royal palaces there, one of them, 
E-kharsag, in the eighteenth year of his reign, and 
the other, E-khalbi, three years later. In Ur, too, 
we obtain evidence of an important administrative 
reform, by the recovery of three weights for half a 
maneh, two manehs, and twelve manehs respectively. 
The inscription upon one of these states that it had 
been tested and passed as of full weight in the sealing- 
house dedicated to Nannar. Dungi, in fact, introduced 
a uniform standard of weights for use in at least the 
Babylonian portion of his empire ; and he sought to 
render his enactments with regard to them effective, by 

' The reading of the last syllahle of the name is uncertain. 


establiUiing an offical te.stii\o-lioiise at Ur, Mhicli was 
probably attached to the tejiij)le of the Mooii-nod ;md 
conducted under the direction of tlie central priesthood. 
Here the original standards were preserved, and all 
local standards that were intended for use in other 
cities had no doubt to be attested by the official inscrip- 
tion of the king. It may be added that, in addition 
to the weights of his own period that ha^•e been re- 
covered, a copy of one has survived, which was made 
after his standard in the Neo-15abylonian period.' 

A considerable part of our knowledge of Duiigi's 
reign has been derived from the tablets found at 'JY-llo, 
and from them we also obtain indirect evidence of the 
uniform character of his system of administration. As 
he introduced a fixed standard of weight for use 
throughout Babylonia, so he applied a single system 
of time-reckoning, in place of the local systems of 
dating, which had, until the reign of his father, })re- 
vailed in the different cities since the fall of the Dynasty 
of Akkad. The official title for each year was fixed in 
Ur, and was then published in each city of his em])ire, 
where it was adopted as the correct formula. This 
change had already been begun by Ur-Engur. who had 
probably introduced the central system into each city 
over which he obtained control ; with Dungi we may 
infer that it became universal, not only throughout 
Sumer and Akkad, but also in the outlying provinces 
of his empire. In the provincial cities the scribes 
frequently added to the date-fornmla the name of their 
local patesi, who was in office at the time, and from 
such notes upon the Tello tablets we obtain the names 
of four patesis of Lagash who were Dimgi's contem- 
poraries during the last twenty years he occupied the 
throne. Similarly on tablets found atJokha^we learn 
that in the forty-fourth year of Dungis reign Ur-ncsu 
was patesi of the city of Umma ; while a seal-impression 
on another tablet from Tello supplies the name of 
Ur-Pasag, who was patesi of the city of Dungi- Habbar. 
The sealings upon tablets of the period aflbrd some 
indication of the decrease in influence attaching to the 

» Brit. Mus. No. 91,005 ; cf. " Guide," p. Ilt3 f. 
« Cf. Scheil, " Rec. de trav.," XIX., p. 02 f. 


office of patesi, which resulted from the centraliza- 
tion of authority in Ur. Subordinate officials could 
employ Dungi's name, not that of their local patesi, 
upon their seals of office, proving that, like the patesi 
himself, they held their appointments direct from the 

Of the patesis who held office in Lagash during 
Dungi's earlier years, the name of only one, a certain 
Galu-kazal, has been recovered. He dedicated a vase 
to Ningirsu for the preservation of Dungi's life,^ and 
his daughter Khala-Lama presented a remarkable female 
statuette to the goddess Bau with the same object.^ Of 
the later patesis we know that Galu-andul was in office 
during the tliirty-ninth year of Dungi's reign, and that 
Ur-Lama I. ruled for at least seven years from his forty- 
second to his forty-eighth year. The patesiate of Alia, 
who was in office during his fiftieth year, was very 
short, for he was succeeded in the following year by 
Ur-Lama II., who survived Dungi and continued to 
rule in Lagash for three, and possibly four, years of 
Bur-Sin's reign. Among the public works undertaken 
by Dungi in Lagash, we know that he rebuilt E-ninnu, 
A^ingirsu's temple, the great temple dedicated to the 
goddess Nina, and E-salgilsa, the shrine of the goddess 
Ninmar in Girsu. E::cavations upon other sites will 
doubtless reveal traces of the other buildings, which he 
erected in the course of his long reign of fifty-eight 
years. Indeed, the texts already recovered contain 
references to work on buildings, the sites of which are 
not yet identified, such as the restoration of Ubara, and 
the founding of Bad-mada, " The Wall (or Fortification) 
of the Land." As the latter was constructed in his 
forty-seventh year, after the principal epoch of his 
Elamite campaigns, it may have been a strongly fortified 
garrison-town upon the frontier, from which he 
could exercise control over his recently acquired 

In view of Dungi's exceptionally long reign, it is 
probable that Bur-Sin was already advanced in years 
when he succeeded his father upon the throne of Ur. 

» See Heuzey, " Ilev. d'Assyr.," IV., p. 90. 
« Cf. ''Dec. en Clialdee/' pi. 21, Fig. 4. 


However this may be, he reigned for only nine years, 
and Gimil-Sin, his son Avho succeeded liini, ior only seven 
years/ A longer reign was that of Ibi-Sin, Giniil-Sin's 
son and successor, who held his throne for a generation, 
but finally lost it and brought Ur-Engur s dynasty to 
an inglorious end. These last rulers of the Dynasty of 
Ur appear to have maintained the general lines of 
Dungi's poHcy, which tliey inherited from him along 
with his empire. The Elamite provinces required to be 
kept in check by the sending of military expeditions 
thither, but in Babylonia itself the rule of Ur was 
accepted without question, and her kings were free to 
devote themselves to the adornment of the great 
temples in the land. It is of interest to note that 
under Bur-Sin and his son the importance of the central 
shrine of Nippur was fully recognized, and emphasis was 
laid on Enhl's position at the head of the Babylonian 
pantheon. Evidence of this may be seen in the addi- 
tional titles, which these two rulers adopted in their 
foundation-inscriptions and votive texts that have come 
down to us. Bur-Sin's regular titles of " King of Ur, 
king of the four quarters " are generally preceded by the 
phrase " whose name Enlil has pronounced in Nippur, 
who raised the head of Enlil's temple," while Gimil- Sin 
describes himself as "the beloved of Enlil," "whom 
Enlil has chosen as his heart's beloved," or " whom 
p],nlil in his heart has chosen to be the shepherd of the 
land and of the four quarters." From inscriptions found 
at Nippur we know that Bur- Sin added to the great 
temple of E-kur, and also built a storehouse for 
offerings of honey, butter and wine, while his third 
year was dated by the construction of a great throne in 
Enhl's honour. Gimil-Sin appears to have been equally 
active in his de^^otion to the shrine, for two years of his 
short reign derive their titles from the setting up of a 
great stele and the construction of a sacred boat, both 
in honour of Enlil and his consort. 

The peculiar honour paid to Enlil does not appear 
to have affected the cult of tlie Moon-god, the patron 

1 Gimil-Sin possibly reigned for nine years ; see Kuj^ler, " Sternkunde," 
II., p. 151 f. Another son of Bur-Sin was Ur-Bau, vvliose name occurs on 
a seal-impression from Tello (cf. Scheil, "Rec. de trav./' XIX., p. 49). 


deity of Ur, for both Bur-Sin and Gimil-Sin rebuilt and 
added to the great temple of Sin, or Nannar, in their 
capital.^ They also followed Dungi in his care for the 
shrine of Euki at Eridu ; and there is evidence that Bur- 
Sin rebuilt the temple of Ninni at Ercch, while the last 
year of Gimil-Sin's reign was signalized by the rebuilding 
of the city-temple at Umma. It is thus clear that the 
later members of Ur-Engur's dynasty continued the 
rebuilding of the temples of Babylonia, which character- 
ized his reign and that of Dungi. Another practice 
which they inherited was the deification of the reigning 
king. Not only did they assume the divine determi- 
native before their names, but Bur- Sin styles himself 
" the righteous god of his land," or " the righteous god, 
the sun of his hind." He also set up a statue of him- 
self, which he named " Bur-Sin, the beloved of Ur," and 
placed it in the temple of the Moon-god under the 
protection of Nannar and Ningal. It would seem that 
it became the custom at this time for the reigning king 
to erect statues of himself in the great temples of the 
land, where regular offerings were made to them as to 
the statues of the gods themselves. Thus a tablet from 
Tello mentions certain offerings made at the Feast of 
the New Moon to statues of Gimil-Sin, which stood in 
the two principal temples of Lagash, those of Ningirsu 
and the goddess Bau.^ It should be added that the 
tablet is dated in the fifth year of Gimil-Sin's reign. In 
view of Nannar 's rank as god of the suzerain city, the 
Feasts of the New Moon were naturally regarded, even 
in the provincial cities, as of peculiar importance in the 
sacred calendar. 

Whenever the king rebuilt or added to a temple we 
may assume that he inaugurated there a new centre of 
his cult, but it is certain that temples were also erected 
which were devoted entirely to his worship. Thus 
Dungi dated a year of his reign by the appointment of 
a high-priest of his o^vn cult, an act which suggests that 
on his assumption of divine rank he founded a temple 
in his own honour. Moreover, under his successors 

* Devotion to the Moon-god is also expressed by their names and that of 

2 Cf. Thureau-Daiigin, " Rec. de trav./' XIX., pp. 185 fF. 

^ <■ '-' 
— 'X -. 

> y. 

rt — * 

/. — 
y. . 

y ■. 


liigh ofKcials souglit the royal fiivoiir by huikliiig and 
dedicating shrines to the reigning king. 'J'his is proved 
by a votive inscription of Liigal-niagurri, the patesi of 
Ur and commander of tlie fortress, which records that 
he founded a temple in honour of Gimil-Sin, '' liis god." 
At the king's death his cult did not die with him, but 
he continued to be worshipped and offerings were made 
to him at the Feast of the New Moon. Tablets from 
Tello, dated during the later years of the Dynasty of 
Ur, record the making of such offerings to Dungi, and 
it is noteworthy that the patesis Ur-Lama and Gudea 
were also honoured in the same way. We have seen that 
Gudea was probably not deified in his owti lifetime, but at 
this period he takes his place beside the god Dunpae in 
the rites of the New Moon. Offerings in his honour, 
accompanied by sacrifices, were repeated six times a 
year, and a special class of priests was attached to his 
service.^ An interesting survival, or trace, of this 
practice occurs in an explanatory list of gods, drawn 
up for Ashur-bani-pal's Library at Nineveh, where Bur- 
Sin's name is explained as that of an attendant deity in 
the service of the Moon-god.^ 

The later kings of Ur appear to have retained 
possession of the empire acquired by Dimgi, but we may 
assume that, like him, they were constantly obliged to 
enforce their authority. Tablets have been found at Susa 
dated by the official formukp of Bur-Sin,^ proving that the 
capital of Elam remained under his control, but, before 
he had been two years upon the throne, he was 
obliged to undertake the reconquest of Urbillu. Other 
successful expeditions were made in his sixth and 
seventh years, which resulted in the subjugation of 
Shashru and Khukhunuri, or Khukhnuri. The date- 
formulee of Gimil-Sin's reign record that he conquered 
Simanu in his third year, and four years later the land 
of Zabshali, wliile the only conquest of Ibi-Sin of 
which we possess a record is that of Simuru. A date- 
formula of this period also commemorates tlie marriage 
of the patesi of Zabshali to Tukin-khatti-migrisha, the 

1 See Scheil, "Ilec. de trav.," XVIII., pp. 64 ff. 

2 See "Cuneiform Texts in the British Museum/' Pt. XXV., p. 7. 
5 Cf. Scheil, "Textes Elam.-Se'mit.," IV., p. 73 f. 


daughter of the king, but it is not certain to which 
reign this event should be assigned. Evidence of the 
extent of Gimil-Sin's authority in the direction of the 
]\Iediterranean may be seen in the date-formula for 
his fourth year, which commemorates his building of 
the Wall, or Fortification, of the West, entitled Murik- 
Tidnim. Since Tidnu was explained by the Assyrian 
geographers as another name for Amurru ^ and may be 
connected with Tidanu, the mountain in Amurru from 
which Gudea obtained his marble,^ we may infer that at 
least a portion of Syria acknowledged the suzerainty of 
Ur during his reign. 

Of the comparatively long reign of Ibi-Sin, and of 
the events which preceded the downfall of the Dynasty 
of Ur, we know little, but already during the reigns of 
his predecessors it is possible to trace some of the causes 
which led to the decline of the city's power. The 
wealth obtained from the Elamite provinces and the large 
increase in the number of public slaves must have intro- 
duced an element of luxury into Sumerian life, which 
would tend to undermine the military qualities of the 
people and their incHnation for foreign service. The in- 
corporation of Sumer and Akkad into a single empire had 
broken down the last traces of political division betAveen 
the great cities of the land, and, while it had put an end 
to local patriotism, it had not encouraged in its place 
the growth of any feeling of loyalty to the suzerain city. 
All the great provincial towns were doubtless required 
to furnish contingents for the numerous military cam- 
paigns of the period, and tliey could have had little 
satisfaction in seeing the fruits of their conquests 
diverted to the aggrandizement of a city other than their 
own. The assumption of divine rank by the later kings 
of Ur may in itself be regarded as a symptom of the 
spirit wliich governed their administration. In the case 
of Dungi the innovation had followed the sudden ex- 
pansion of his empire, and its adoption had been based 
upon political as much as upon personal grounds. But 
with his descendants the practice had been carried to 
more extravagant lengths, and it undoubtedly afforded 

' Cf. Tliurcau-Dangiii, " Rec. de trav.," XIX., p. 185. 
2 See above, p. 2G1. 


opportunities for royal favourities to obtain by flattery 
an undue influence in the state. 

We have ah-eady seen that Lugal-niagurri, who 
combined the civil office of patesi of Ur with the 
military appointment of commander of the fortress, 
founded a temple for the worship of Gimil-Sin, and it is 
clear that such an act woidd have opened an easier road 
to the royal fevour than the successful prosecution of a 
campaign. It was probably by such methods that 
ministers at the court of Ur secured the enjoyment 
of a plurality of offices, which had previously been 
administered with far greater efficiency in separate 
hands. The most striking example is afforded by Arad- 
Nannar, whose name as that of a patesi of Lagash is 
frequently mentioned upon dated tablets from Tello. He 
was " sukkal-makh," or chief minister, under the last 
three kings of Ur, and appears to have succeeded his 
father Ur-Dunpae, who had held this post in Dungi's 
reign. From the Tello tablets we know that he also 
held the patesiate of Lagash during this period, for he 
received the appointment towards the end of Bur-Sin's 
reign ^ and continued to hold it under Ibi-Sin. But the 
patesiate of Lagash was only one of many posts which 
he combined. For two gate-sockets have been found 
at Tello, which originally formed parts of a temple 
founded in Girsu by Arad-Xannar for the cult of Gimil- 
Sin, and in the inscriptions upon them he has left us a 
list of his appointments.- 

In addition to holding the posts of chief minister 
and patesi of Lagash, he was also priest of Enki, 
governor of Uzargarshana, governor of Babishue, patesi 
of Sabu and of the land of Gutebu, governor of Timat- 
Enlil, patesi of Al-Gimil-Sin,^ governor of Urbillu, 
patesi of Khamasi and of Gankhar, governor of Ikhi, 
and governor of the Su-people and of the land of 
Kardaka. At some time during the reign of Gimil-Sin 
Arad-Nannar thus combined in his own person twelve 

^ One other patesi, tlie reading of wliose name is uncertain, appears to 
liave separated Arad-Nannar from Ur-Lama II. 

2 See Thureau-Dangin, " Rev. d'Assyr.," V., pp. 99 ff. ; VI., p. 67 f. ; and 
" Konigsiuschriften," pp. 148 ff. ; cf. also "Comptes rendus," 1902, pp. 91 ff. 

3 " The City of Girail-Sin^" i.e., a town named after the reigning king and 
probably founded by him. 


important appointments, involving the administration 
of no less than thirteen separate cities and provinces. 
The position of some of the places enumerated is still 
uncertain, but it is clear that several were widely sejjarated 
from one another. While I..agash, for instance, lay in 
the south of Sumer, Sabu was in Elam and Urbillu and 
Gankhar more to the north in the region of the Zagros 

This centralization of authority under the later kings 
of Ur undoubtedly destroyed the power attaching to 
the patesiate at a time when the separate cities of the 
land had enjoyed a practical autonomy ; and it in- 
cidentally explains the survival of the title, under the 
First Dynasty of Babylon, as that of a comparatively 
subordinate class of officials. But the pohcy of centraliza- 
tion must have had a more immediate effect on the 
general administration of the empire. For it un- 
doubtedly lessened the responsibilities of local governors, 
and it placed the central authority, which the king 
himself had previously enjoyed, in the hands of a few 
officials of the court. The king's deification un- 
doubtedly tended to encourage his withdrawal from 
the active control of affairs, and, so long as his divine 
rites were duly celebrated, he was probably content to 
accept without question the reports his courtiers pre- 
sented to him. Such a system of government was 
bound to end in national disaster, and it is not surpris- 
ing that the dynasty was brought to an end within 
forty-one years of Dungi's death. We may postpone 
until the next chapter an account of the manner in 
which the hegemony in Babylonia passed from the city 
of Ur to I sin. 



THE kingdom of Sumer and Akkad, which had 
been founded by Ur-Engur, survived the full of 
his dynasty, and the centre of authority merely 
passed from one city to another. The change of capital 
did not imply the existence of any new racial moAcment, 
such as that which had led to the rise of Kish and the 
Empire of Akkad. The kings of I sin were probably 
Sumerians like their immediate predecessors, and they 
shared with them the same ideals and culture. No 
doubt a rivalry existed between the great Sumerian 
cities, and any one of them would have been ready to 
contest the power of Ur had there been a prospect of 
success. At tirst sight indeed it might appear that I sin 
now emerged as the victor from such a struggle for tiie 
hegemony. In the dynastic chronicle from Nippur the 
close of tlie Dynasty of Ur and the rise of Isin is briefiy 
recorded in the words " the rule of Ur was overthrown, 
Isin took its kingdom." From this passage alone it 
might be imagined that Ishbi-Ura, the founder of the 
Dynasty of Isin, had headed a revolt against the rule 
of Ur, and had been the direct agent in Ibi-Sin's 

But the fall of the Dynasty of Ur, like that of the 
First Dynasty of Babylon, was due to an external cause 
and not to any movement within the hmits of Babylonia 
itself. We possess no contemporary record of the 
catastrophe which at this time overwhelmed the empire, 
but an echo of it has been preser\ ed in an omen-text, 
inscribed upon an Assyrian tablet from the Library of 



Aslmr-bani-pal. We have already noted instances in 
which genuine historical traditions have been incor- 
porated in the later augural literature, and we need 
have no hesitation in accepting the liistorical accuracy 
of this reference to past events. The text in question 
eninnerates certain omens which it associates with the 
fall of " Ibi-Sin, the King of Ur," who, it states, was 
carried captive to Anshan.^ We may thus infer that it 
was an Elamite invasion that put an end to the 
Dynasty of Ur. The foreign provinces, on the posses- 
sion of which Dungi had based his claim to the rule of 
the four quarters of the world, had finally proved the 
cause of his empire's dow^nfall. 

We have few data on which to form an estimate of 
the extent of the Elamite conquest of Babylonia, or of 
the period during which the country or a portion of it 
was in the hands of the invaders. The deportation of 
the king of Ur can hardly have been the result of a 
spasmodic raid, following one of the numerous pro- 
vincial revolts which had at last proved successful. It 
is far more likely that the capture followed the fall of 
Ur itself, and such an achievement argues the existence 
of an organized force in Elam, which it must have 
required some years to build up. It is therefore per- 
missible to conjecture that, in the course of the twenty- 
five years of his reign, Ibi-Sin had gradually been losing 
his hold upon the Elamite portion of his empire, and 
that an independent kingdom had been formed in Elam 
under a native ruler. For a time Ibi-Sin may have 
continued to hold certain districts, but, after the success- 
ful invasion of Babylonia, the whole of Elam, and for a 
time a part of Babylonia itself, may have fallen to the 
lot of the conqueror. 

It would be tempting to connect the fall of Ur with 
the sack of tlie neighbouring city of Erech by the 
Elamite king Kudur-Nankhundi, which is referred to in 
an inscription of Ashur-bani-pal. When he captured 
Susa in 650 B.C., the Assyrian king relates that he 
recovered tlie image of the goddess Nana, which Kudur- 
Nankhundi had carried off from Erech sixteen hundred 

' See Boissier, " Choix de textes relatifs a la divination," II., p. 64, and 
Meissuer, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," March, 1907, col. 114, n. 1. 


and tliirty-five years before,^ By acccptinu^ these 
figures Kudiir-Nankluindi's invasion lias been assigned 
to an approximate date of 2285 I5.c"., and it was formerly 
supposed that it was iu\ episode in the Khunite wars of 
the First Dynasty of Babylon. But, in consecpience of 
the reduetion in dates necessitated by recent discoveries, 
it follows that, if Ashur-bani-pars figures be accepted 
as correct, Kudur-Nankhundi's invasion must have taken 
place before the rise of Babylon. It cannot have 
occurred at a time when the kings of Ur were all- 
powerful in Babylonia, and still retained an eflective 
hold on Elam ; so that, unless we assign the invasion to 
some period of unrest during the Dynasty of Isin, no 
more probable epoch presents itself than that of the 
Elamite invasion which put an end to the Dynasty of 
Ur, and allowed Isin to secure the hegemony in 

The want of some synchronism, or fixed point of 
contact, between the earlier history of Elam and that of 
Sumer and Akkad renders it diflicult to settle the period 
of those native Elamite rulers whose names occur in 
building-inscriptions, recovered during tlie French 
excavations at Susa. Some of the texts enumerate a 
succession of Elamite princes, who had in turn taken 
part in the reconstruction of buildings in that city,^ and, 
although we are thus enabled to arrange their names in 
relative chronological order, it is not until towards the 
close of the First Dynasty of Babylon tliat we can 
definitely fix the date of any one of them. Of earlier 
rulers, the members of the dynasty of Ivhutran-tepti 
probably reigned at a period subsequent to that of Basha- 
Shushinak.' In addition to Khutran-tepti himself, the 
names of three of his descendants have been recovered, 
Itaddu I., and his son Kal-Kukliuratir, and his grandson 
Itaddu 11. Since these rulers bore the title patesi of 
Susa, it is possible that, like Urkium, Zarik and Beli- 
arik, who are mentioned on tablets from Tello," they 
owed allegiance to Babylonia, during the period of the 

» See '' Cun. Inscr. V^est. Asia," Vol. III., pi. 38, No. 1, Obv., 1. IG. ^ 

2 Cf. Scheil, " Textes Elam.-Auzan.," II., p. 20; "Textes Llam.-bemjt., 
III., p. 29, and IV., p. 15. 

3 See above, p. 289. * See above, p. 291. 


DjTiasty of Ur.' A later Elamite dynasty was that 
which traced its descent from Ebarti, or from his son 
Shilkhakha. Two of Shilkhakha's descendants" were 
Shirukdu' or Shirukdukli, and Simebalar-kluippak, and 
tliese were divided from a later group by Kuk-Kirmesh, 
the son of Lankukii. The later group of his de- 
scendants, whose names have yet been reco\'ered, con- 
sists of Adda-Pakshu, Temti-khalki and Kuk-Nashur, 
or Kukka-Nasher, the descendant of Kal-Uli.^ What 
intervals of time separated the different members of the 
dynasty from one another is still a matter for conjecture. 
It is noteworthy that the members of Ebarti's 
dynasty, whose inscriptions have been recovered, bear 
different titles to those of the earlier dynasty of Khutran- 
tepti. AVhile the latter styled themselves patesis of 
Susa and governors {shakkanakJxu) of Elam, their 
successors claim the title of sukkal of Elam, of Simash, 
and of Susa. It has been suggested that the title of 
sukkallu may have carried with it an idea of independ- 
ence from foreign control, which is absent from that of 
patesi, and the alteration of title has been regarded as 
reflecting a corresponding change in the political con- 
dition of Elam. The view has been put forward that 
the rulers of Elam, who styled themselves sukkallu, 
reigned at a period when Elam was independent and 
possibly exercised suzerainty over the neighbouring 
districts of Babylonia.* The worker of this change was 
assumed to be Kudur-Nankhundi, and in support of the 
suggestion it was pointed out that a certain Kutir- 
Nakhkhunte, whose name occurs in a votive inscription 

' The patesis Ur-Ningishzida, Ibalpel, Belaku and [. . .Jinasliu, who 
ruled in Tupliasli, or Ashnuunak, in the neig-hbourhood of Klam (cf. Thureau- 
Dang-in, " Konigsinschriften/' p. 174 f.) probably owed alleg-iance to the king's 
of Ur or Isin. Ur-Ningirsu^ who was also said to be a patesi of Tupliasli, is 
merely a misreading of Ur-Ningishzida's name; cf. Ungnad, ''Orient. Lit.- 
Zeit," IDO'.l, col. IGl f. 

2 'J'lie phrase ''son of the sister of,'' which occurs in the insci-iptions, is 
clearly not to be taken literally, but is used in the sense of a descendant (cf. 
Thuroau-Uangin, " Konigsinschriften," p. 18.3, n. 2) ; it does not necessarily 
imply that the throne actually passed through the female branch (as Meyer, 
" (ieschichte dos Altertums," Bd. I. , lift. II., p. 542, suggests), except possibly 
in the absence of direct descendants in tlie male line. 

3 One of the native texts sets Kuk-Nashur before Temti-khalki, but this 
was obviously due to a confusion with Adda-l*aks!iu ; cf. Unguad, " Beitr. 
Eur Assyr.," Bd. VI., No. .5, p. G. 

< Cf. Scheil, "TextesElara.-Auzan.," II., p. x. 


of the period, should possibly be identified with the 
conqueror of Erech. lie is mentioned on inscribed 
bricks of Temti-agun, n sukkalof Susa and a descendant 
of Shirukdukh, from a temple built by this ruler with 
the object of prolonging his own life and those of four 
other Elamites, among them Kutir-Nakhkhunte.^ It 
was thought possible that Temti-agun might have been 
the local ruler of Susa, at a time when Kutir-Nakhkhunte 
exercised control over the whole of Elam and a great 
part of Babylonia. 

The suggested synchronism, if established, would 
have been of considerable assistance in arranging the 
chronology of an obscure period of history, but it cannot 
be regarded as probable. Temti-agun sets no title after 
Kutir-Nakhkhunte's name, an omission tliat is hardly 
compatible with the theory that he was his superior and 
suzerain. Moreover, it is now certain that the title of 
sukkallu, so far from implying a measure of inde- 
pendence, was a distinctive mark of subjection to foreign 
control. For an inscription of the sukkal Kukka- 
Nasher has recently been published,^ which is dated by 
a formula of Ammi-zaduga, the last king but one of the 
first Babylonian dynasty, proving that he governed 
Susa in Ammi-zaduga's name. This synchronism is 
the only certain one in the early history of the two 
countries, for it probably disposes of another recently 
suggested between Adda-Pakshu and Sumu-abu, the 
founder of the Babylonian monarchy. A contract- 
tablet of the epoch of Adda-Pakshu is dated in " the 
year of Shumu-abi," who has been identified with Sumu- 
abu, the Babylonian king.^ Apart from the fact that 
no title follows Shumu-abi's name, it has been pointed 
out that a far shorter interval separated Adda-Pakslui 
from Kuk-Nashur.* We are therefore reduced to the 
conclusion that at any rate the later members of 

1 Cf. "Textes Elani.-Scmit.," III., p. 23, pi. 7, Nos. 1-3. 

2 See " Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmaler," VII., p. 28, No. G7, and cf. 
Ungnad, ''Beitr. zur. Assyr.," Bd. VI., No. 6, p. 3 f. 

3 See Scheil, ''Textes P'lam.-Semit.," IV., pp. 18 and 20. 

* The titles borne by Kuk-Kirmesh, who reigned before Adda-Pakshu, and 
those of Temti-khalki and Kuk-Nashur are so similar, that it is unlikely their 
periods were separated by the great political upheaval which took place in 
Hammurabi's reign ; cf. Ungnad, " Beitr. zur Assyr.," Bd. VI,, No. 6, p. 6f. 


Ebarti's dynasty owed allegiance to Babylon, and it is a 
legitimate assumption that the earlier rulers, who also 
bore the title of sukkaUu, acknowledged the suzerainty 
of either Babylon or Isin. The control exercised by 
the sovereign state was doubtless often nominal, and it 
is probable that border Avarfare was not of infrequent 
occurrence. A reflection of such a state of affairs may 
probably be seen in the short inscription of Anu-mutabil, 
a governor of the city of Dcr, which he engraved upon 
an olive-shaped stone now in the British IMuseum.* 
This local magnate, avIio probably lived at about the 
period of the Dynasty of Isin, boasts that he broke the 
heads of the men of Anshan, Elam and Simash, and 
conquered Barakhsu. 

We thus obtain from native Elamite sources no 
evidence that Elam exercised control over a portion of 
Babylonia for any considerable period after the fall of 
Ur. The in\ asion of the country, which resulted in the 
deportation of Ibi-Sin, no doubt freed Elam for a time 
from foreign control, and may well have led to the 
establishment of a number of independent states under 
native Elamite rulers. In addition to Kudur-Nankhundi 
we may provisionally assign to this period Kisari, king 
of Gankhar,^ a district wdiich had previously been held 
by the kings of Ur. But it would seem that the 
Elamite states, after their long period of subjection, 
were not sufficiently strong or united to follow up the 
success achieved by Anshan. The dynastic chronicle 
from Nippur records that Isin took the kingdom of Ur, 
and we may assume that Ishbi-Ura was not long in re- 
establishing the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad with his 
own city as its capital. The Elamite invasion may well 
have been confined to the south of Sumer, and among 
the cities that had been left unaffected the most power- 
ful would naturally assert itself Evidence that Ishbi- 
Ura soon freed himself from Elamite interference may 
possibly be seen in a reference to him upon an Assyrian 

1 Cf. ''C\xn. Texts in the Brit. Mus.," Pt. XXI., pi. 1 and " Konigsin- 
schriften," p. 17« f. 

^ His name occurs upon a cylinder-seal of Masiam-Ishtar, an official in his 
service ; see " Collection de Clercq," p. 83, pi. xiv.. No. 121, and " Konigs- 
inschriften," p. 174 f. 



omen-tablet, wliicli states that "he liad no rivals."^ 
The phrase is certainly ^af^ue, but it at least bears 
witness to the reputation which his achievements secured 
for him in the traditions of a later a^je. 

We possess few records of the kings of Isin, and 
the greater part of our information concerning the 
dynasty is furnished by the Nippur dynastic list. 
From this document we know that it lasted for two 
hundred and twenty-five years and six months, and 
consisted of sixteen kings. These fall naturally into 
four groups. The first group comprises the family of 
Ishbi-Ura, four of whose direct descendants succeeded 
him upon the throne, their reigns together with his 
occupying a period of ninety-four years. The second 
group consists of Ur-Xinib and three of his descendants, 
who reigned for sixty-one years. Then followed a 
period of thirty-six and a half years, din-ing which no 
less than five kings ruled in Isin, and, since none of 
them were related, it was clearly a time of great political 
unrest. A more stable condition of things appears to 
have prevailed during the closing period of thirty-four 
years, occupied by the reigns of Sin-magir and his son 
Damik-ilishu, under whom the dynasty came to an end. 
A number of tablets dated during the Dynasty of Isin 
have been found at Niffer, and at least one at Abu 
Habba, while a few short votive inscriptions of some 
of the kings themselves have been recovered on these 
two sites and also at Ur and Babylon, lleferenccs to 
four of the kings of Isin in later Babylonian traditions 
complete the material from which a knowledge of the 
period can be obtained. The information derived from 
these rather scanty sources, combined with the succes- 
sion of rulers on the Nippur hst, enables us to sketch 
in outline tlie progress of events, but it naturally leaves 
many problems unsettled, for the solution of which we 
must await further discoveries. 

The late tradition of Ishbi-Ura's successful reign 
is supported by the fact that he ruled for thirty-two 
years and firmly established his own family upon the 
throne of Isin. He was succeeded by his son Gimil- 

1 See Boissier, '^ Doc. rel. a la div./' I., p. 30, K.3970, Rev. 1. 16, and 
Meissner, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1907, col. 114, n. 1. 


ilishu, who reigned for ten years. A very fragmentary 
inscription of Idin-Dagan, the son of Gimil-iHshu, who 
reigned for twenty-one years, has been found at Abu 
Habba,^ proving that Sippar acknowledged his authority. 
Indeed, it is probable that already in Ishbi-Ura's reign 
Akkad as well as Sunier formed part of the kingdom 
of Isin, and evidence that this was the normal state 
of affairs may be seen in the fact that each king of 
Isin, of whom we possess a building-inscription or a 
votive text, lays claim to the title of King of Sumer 
and Akkad. The earliest record of this character is 
an inscription upon bricks found at JNIukayyar and 
dating from the reign of Ishme-Dagan, the son and 
successor of Idin-Dagan. In addition to his titles of 
King of Isin and King of Sumer and Akkad, he styles 
himself Lord of Erech and records in various phrases 
the favour he has shown to the cities of Nippur, Ur, 
and Eridu ; while his building activity at Nippur is 
attested by numerous bricks bearing his name and titles, 
which have been found on that site. The same cities 
are also mentioned in the titles borne by Libit-Ishtar, 
Ishme-Dagan's son, who succeeded to the throne after 
his father had reigned for twenty years. Both these 
rulers appear to have devoted themselves to the cult 
of Ninni, the great goddess of Erech, and Ishme-Dagan 
even styles himself her " beloved spouse." His claim to 
be the consort of the goddess was doubtless based on 
his assumption of divine rank, a practice which the 
kings of Isin inherited from the Dynasty of Ur.^ 

Libit-Ishtar was the last member of Ishbi-Ura's 
family to occupy the throne of Isin. He reigned for 
eleven years, and with his successor, Ur-Ninib, the 
throne passed to a different ftimily. We may probably 
connect this change in the succession with the fact that 
about this time an independent kingdom makes its 
appearance in Larsa and Ur. For anotlicr son of Ishme- 
Dagan, named Enannatum, who was chief priest in 
the temple of the JMoon-god at Ur, has left us an 

» See Scheil, "Rec. de trav./' Vol. XVI., pp. 187 ff., and Radaii, "Early 
Bab, Hist," p. 232 f. 

2 This is proved by tlie fact that in their own inscriptions that have been 
recovered the determinative for divinity precedes their names. 










inscription upon clay cones, in vhich he records that 
he rebuilt the temple of tlie Sun-god at I^arsa for the 
preservation of his own life and that of Gungunu, the 
king of Ur.^ Gungunu himself, upon a brick-inscription 
commemorating his building of the great wall of Larsa, 
claims to be king of that city and also of the whole 
of Sumer and Akkad. It would therefore seem that 
towards the close of Libit-Ishtar's reign, or immediately 
after it, Gungunu established an independent kingdom 
with its capital at Larsa. It is strange that in the city 
of Ur, which was under his control, a son of Ishme- 
Dagan should continue to hold, or should be invested 
with, the office of chief priest, and there is something 
to be said for the suggestion that Libit-Ishtar's fall 
may not have been brought about by any active hostility 
on the part of Gungunu, but by a foreign invasion from 

According to this view Isin was captured by the 
invaders,^ and in the confusion that followed Larsa 
secured the hegemony in Sumer. Howe\'er this may 
be, it is probable that Gungunu's authority was of brief 
duration ; for Ur-Xinib is represented by the dynastic 
list as Libit-Ishtar's immediate successor, and in an 
inscription of his own upon a brick from Nippur he 
not only claims the titles of King of Isin and King 
of Sumer and Akkad, but, like the earlier king Ishme- 
Dagan, styles himself I^ord of Erech, and the patron 
of Nippur, Ur, and Eridu.* We may therefore assume 
that Ur-Ninib was successful in re-establishing the 
power of Isin, and in uniting once more the whole of 

' For one of the cones^ see the plate opposite p. 314. In a brick-inscrip- 
tion from Mui>a\ yar, inscribed with Knannatum's name and title, be calls 
himself the son of Ishme-Dagan, the Kin^ of Sumer and Akkad ; and it is 
quite possible that he received his appointment as priest of the Moon-god 
during his father's life-time or in the reign of his brother Libit-Ishtar. 

- Cf. Hilprecht, " Math., Met., and Chron. Tablets/' p. 5-1. For an alterna- 
tive suggestion that the invasion was from Amurru, see below, p. 315 f. 

■' Nippur, too, may have shared the like fate, if the breaking and scattering 
of votive objects, deposited by earlier kings in the temple of Kulil, is to be 
traced to this invasion. 

* Gungunu's death is recorded in a date-formula upon a tablet from 
Senkera (Larsa), which reads " the year in which Gungunu died " (see 
Scheil, "Rec. de trav.," Vol. XXI., p. 125. Since the death of a king from 
natural causes was never commemorated in this fashion, we may conclude that 
he was slain in battle, probably by Ur-Niuib. 


Siimer and Akkad under its sway. After a reign of 
twenty-eight years he was followed by his son Bur- 
Sin II., who bore the same titles as his father and 
mentions the same list of cities as having enjoyed 
his special favour. His comparatively long reign of 
twenty-one years is a further indication that Ur-Ninib's 
restoration of order had been effective. The last two 
descendants of Ur-Ninib to occupy the throne of I sin 
Avere sons of Bur-Sin. Of Iter-kasha, who reigned for 
only five Vears, we know nothing, but the name of his 
brother Ura-imitti, and the strange manner in which he 
met his death after appointing his successor, have been 
preserved in later Babylonian tradition. 

In the chronicle concerning Sargon of Akkad and 
other early Babylonian kings, to which reference has 
already been made,' a section is devoted to Ura-imitti, 
from which we gather that, ha\ing no son to succeed 
him upon the throne, he named Enlil-bani, his gardener, 
as his successor.^ The text relates that, after placing 
the crown of his sovereignty upon Enlil-bani's head, he 
met his own death within his palace either through 
misadventure or by poison.^ With him, therefore, 
Ur-Ninib's family came to an end, and, in view of the 
strange manner of his death and the humble rank of 
the successor he had appointed, it was but natural that 
Enlil-bani's claim to the throne should not have been 
at once, nor universally, recognized. During the struggle 
that followed Ur-imitti's death a certain Sin-ikisha^ 
established himself in Isin, and for six months retained 
the throne. But at the end of this time Enlil-bani 

1 See above, pp. 220, 225 ff., 282 f. 

2 The story was also told in the liistory of Ag'athias (II., 25, ed. Dindorf, 
p. 222) of Beleous and Beletaras, who are described by him as early Assyrian 
kinps (see King, " Chronicles," I., p. 63 f.). But there is no doubt that L'ra- 
iniitti was the ninth kinpr of Isin, since Hilprecht has since decijdiered traces 
of his name in the Nippur dynastic list and has also found it in a date-'"ormula 
on an early contract from Nippur (see " Zeits. fiir Assyr.," pp. 20 ff.). More- 
over, the name of Enlil-bani occurs in the Nippur list as that of the eleventh 
kinf^ of Isin. 

^ The meaning of the phrases in the te.\t is exceedingly obscure ; cf Kingj 
" Clirouicles,'-' I., p. G4 f., n. 1. 

* Sin-ikisha's name, which is broken in the Nippur list, has been restored 
from a contract-tablet preserved in the Pennsylvania ]Mu.seum (see Poebel, 
" Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," l!)07, col. 461 ff.). The contract is dated in the year in 
which Sin-ikisha made an image of gold and silver for the Sun-god. 


succeeded in oustinii' him from that position, and, 
having secured the throne liimself, lie continued to 
reign in I sin for twenty-four years. As he had hccn 
called to the throne by Ura-imitti, he cannot be regarded 
as a usurper, but he did not succeed in establishing a 
settled dynasty. Zambia,^ who followed him, was a 
usurper, and after only three years he was in turn 
displaced. Two other usurpers held the throne for 
five and four years respectively, and only with Sin- 
magir, the fifteenth king of Isin, was a settled dynasty 
once more established. 

During this period of confusion it is probable that 
the internal troubles of Isin reacted upon her political 
influence in Babylonia. It is also possible that the 
quick changes in the succession may have, in part, been 
brought about by events which Avere happening in 
other cities of Sumer and Akkad.^ It has, indeed, 
been suggested that the Dynasty of Isin and the First 
Dynasty of Babylon overlapped each other,^ as is pro\ed 
to have been the case with the first three dynasties of 
the Babylonian List of Kings. If that were so, not 
only the earlier kings of Babylon, but also the kings of 
Larsa and the less powerful kings of Erech, would all 
have been reigning contemporaneously with the later 
kings of Isin. In fact, we should picture the kingdom 

' For the recovery of Zambia's name, by means of a contract-tablet at 
Constantinople dated in his accession-year, see Hilprecht, "Orient. Lit.- 
Zeit.," 1907, col. 385 ff. Hommel and Hilprecht (cf. "Zeits. fur Assyr.," 
XXI., p. 29) regard Zambia as an abbreviated form of the name of Sal>Dagan, 
which occurs as that of a king on the obverse of the Neo-Babylonian map of 
the world preserved in the British Museum ("Cun.Texts/'XXII., pi. 48, Obv., 
1. 10). But the name of the city or land, which followed the title of the king, 
is wanting, and Hilprecht's suggested reading of the name preceding Sab- 
Dagan as that of Ura-imitti is not supported by the traces on the tablet. The 
god's name is written clearly as Shamash, not Ura. 

2 It is probal)le that Sumu ilu, an early king of Vr, reigned in this period. 
His name is known from the steatite figure of a dog, which the priest Aliba- 
dugga, the son of a certain Urukagina, dedicated on his behalf to the goddess 
Nin-Isin, " tlie Lady of Isin" (cf. Thureau-Dangin, "Rev. d'Assyr.," VI., 
p. 69 f.). His date is uncertain, but, like Gungunu, he may have taken 
advantage of troubles in Isin to establish an independent kingdom for a time 
in Ur. 

3 See Hilprecht, "Math., Met., and Chron. Tablets," pp. 43, 49 f., n. 6. 
I also mentioned the possibility in "Chronicles,'' I., p. 168, n. 1, and the 
view has been adopted by Ilanke, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1907, col. 109 ff., and 
Ungnad, "Zeits. der Deutsch. Morgenliind. Gesellschaft," Bd. LXI., p. 714, 
and " Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1908, ool. 66. Meyer al.'^o accepts tlie hypothesis ; 
see " Geschichte des Altertums," Bd. I., Hft. II., pp. 344 f., 504 f. 


of Sumer and Akkad as divided into a nnmber of 
smaller principalities, each vying with the other in a 
contest for the hegemony, and maintaining a compara- 
tively independent rule within their own borders. Such 
a condition of affairs would amply account for the con- 
fusion in the succession at Isin, and our scanty know- 
ledge of the period could be supplemented from our 
sources of information concerning the history of the 
earlier kings of Babylon. 

The view is certainly attractive, but for that very 
reason it is necessary to examine carefully the grounds 
upon which it is based. For deciding the inter-relations 
of the first three dynasties of the Babylonian King- 
List, we have certain definite synchronisms established 
between members of the different dynasties.^ But 
between the kings of Babylon and Isin no such syn- 
chronism has been furnished by the texts. The theory 
that the two dynasties were partly contemporaneous 
rests upon data which admit of more than one interpre- 
tation, while additional reasons adduced in its support 
have smce been discredited. 

The principal fact upon which those who accept 
the theory rely is that a capture of the city of Isin is 
commemorated in the formula for the seventeenth year 
of Sin-muballit, the fifth king of the First Dynasty 
of Babylon and the father of Hammurabi.^ Now a 
capture of the city of Isin by llim-Sin, King of Larsa, 
is also recorded in formulae upon contract-tablets found 
at Tell Sifr, and that considerable importance was 
attached locally to this event is attested by the fact 
that it formed an epoch for dating tablets in that 
district.' The theory necessitates two assumptions, the 
first to the effect that the date-formuhe of Rim-Sin and 
Sin-muballit refer to the same capture of the city ; and, 
secondly, that this event brought the Dynasty of Isin 
to an end. Granting these hypotheses, the twenty- 
third year of Damik-ihshu would have coincided with 

* See above, p. 62. 

2 See King, " Letters of TTammuralu," III., p. 228 f. 

3 Op. cit., p. 228 f., n. 31). There is no certain indication of the pro- 
venance of the tablet referred to by Sclieil in " Ilec. de trav.," XXI., p. 125, 
though he implies it was found at Senkera, from which Tell Sifr is not 
far distant. The evidence available seems to show that the Isiu-era was 
confined to Larsa and its neighbourhood. 

0> I 




- y. 



y. S 

4- ikv "v > 

^ r^ - 



X — 

k: - 

£ 2i ai < 

i < 2 ^ 

~ u5 8- 

■_■ < ^ .2 
i2 -■ -^ I 

'J. •''■ L/ V 


i < c ^ 

?^2 8 

^ /^ "^ ro 

^ r. •> 


— y 


- J. 






the seventeenth year of Sin-niubanit, and tlie dynasties 
of I sin and of Babylon would have overlapped for a 
period of about ninety-nine years. Thus Suniu-abu, 
the founder of the first Babylonian dynasty, would 
have been the contemporary of Bur-Sin II., kin^^ of 
Isin, in the sixth year of whose reign lie would have 
ascended the throne of Babylon. By the acceptance 
of the theory, not only would tlie relations of the two 
dynasties be definitely fixed, but the chronology for 
the later periods of Sumerian history would be put on 
a comparatively settled basis, as far back at least as the 
age of Ur-Engur and Gudea. 

Additional grounds in support of the theory have 
been deduced from a tablet in the British Museum, 
which is dated in " the year in which the xVmiuTu 
drove out Libit-Ishtar."^ VVe have already seen, from 
information supplied by the Nippur dynastic list, that 
^\'ith Libit-Ishtar, the fifth king of the Dynasty of Isin, 
the family of Ishbi-Ura, its founder, came to an end, 
and that with Ur-Niniba new family was established on 
the throne. By identifying Libit-Ishtar, the king, with 
the personage mentioned in the date-formula, it would 
follow that he lost his throne in consequence of an 
invasion of the vVmurru, or Western Semites, who 
drove him from the city. But presumably they were 
at once dislodged by Ur-Ninib, who retook the city 
and estabhshed his own family upon the throne. 
According to this view, the supposed invasion was but 
an advance wave of the racial movement that was 
eventually to overwhelm the whole of Babylonia. Some 
thirty-three years later, in the reign of Bilr-Sin, Ur- 
Ninib's son, the Western Semites are represented as 
again invading the country, and, although this time 
they do not penetrate to Isin, they succeed in estab- 
lishing a dynasty of their own at Babylon. 

But there are difficulties in the way of accepting 
this further development of the original theory. In 
the first place, it will have been noticed that no title 
follows the name of Libit-Ishtar in the date-formula 

1 See Ranke, "Orient. Lit.-Zeit./' 1907, col. 109 ff. The tablet in 
question is published in " Cun. Texts/' Pt. IV., pi. 22, No. 78,395 (Bu. 88-5- 
12, 294). 


already cited, and there is no particular reason why 
this not uncommon name should be identified with the 
king of Isin. It has further been pointed out that 
another tablet in the British JNIuseum/ of about the 
same period, contains a reference to a Libit-Ishtar who 
was certainly not the king of Isin, but ap^^ears to have 
occupied the important post of governor of a provincial 
city, pro]>ably Sippar/'' The ^vriter of this tablet 
recounts how he had been imprisoned and had appealed 
to Libit-Ishtar to try his case and set him free ; but he 
was met with a refusal, and he afterwards made a similar 
appeal to Amananu, to whom he ascribes the title of 
governor. In this passage Libit-Ishtar has no title, 
but since appeals in legal cases could be referred to 
him, he may very probably have held the same office 
as Amananu, that of governor of the city. In certain 
contract-tablets of Apil-Sin's reign a Libit-Ishtar is also 
mentioned in the place of honour at the head of the 
lists of witnesses, and he too should probably be identi- 
fied with the same official. We may therefore con- 
clude that the Libit-Ishtar in the date-formula served 
as the local governor of Sippar in the time of Apil-Sin, 
until he was driven out by the Amurru. Whether the 
Amurru are here to be regarded as the inhabitants of a 
neighbouring town,^ or as a fresh wave of Western 
Semites, does not affect the point at issue. Since the 
Libit-Ishtar who w^as driven out was not the king of 
Isin, the arguments deduced from the tablet for the 
overlapping of the dynasties of Isin and of Babylon no 
longer apply. 

There only remain to be discussed the original 
grounds for the suggestion that Damik-ilishu was 
Sin-muballit's contemporary, and that the fall of the 
Dynasty of Isin is to be set in the seventeenth year 
of the latter's reign. According to this view the 
conqueror of Isin would have been Rim-Sin, assisted 
by his vassal, Sin-muballit. 15ut a recent discovery has 
shown that Rim-Sin can hardly have been a contempo- 
rary of Sin-muballit, or, at any rate, old enough in the 

» Cf. "Cun. Texts," Pt. \I., pi. 8, No. 80,1G3 (Bu. 91-5-9, 279). 
2 See Meissner, " Orient. Lit.-Zeit.," 1907, col. 113 ff. 
' So Meissner, loc. cit. 


seventeenth year of the hitter's reign to have cuptured 
the city of Isin. From the chronicle concerning early 
Babylonian kings we already knew that he was not 
finally defeated in Hammurabi's thirty-first year, but 
lived on into the reign of Samsu-iluna, by whom he 
was apparently defeated or slain.^ It is true that tlie 
passage is broken, and it has been suggested that the 
record concerns the son of Rim-Sin, and not llim-Sin 
himself.^ But it has now been pointed out that two 
of the contract-tablets found at Tell Sifr, which appear 
to record the same act of sale, and are inscribed with 
the names of the same witnesses, are dated, the one 
by Rim-Sin, the other in Samsu-iluna's tenth year.^ 
However we may explain the existence of these two 
nearly identical copies of the same document, their 
dates certainly imply that Rim-Sin was in possession 
of a portion of Babylonia at least as late as the ninth 
year of Samsu-iluna's reign.* If, therefore, he captured 
Isin in the seventeenth year of Sin-muballit, Samsu- 
iluna's grandfather, we must suppose that his military 
activity in Babylonia extended over a period of at least 
fifty-six years, and probably longer. Such an achieve- 
ment is within the bounds of possibility, but it cannot 
be regarded as probable. 

But, quite apart from this objection, there are snudl 
grounds for the belief that Sin-muballit was Rim-Sin's 
vassal, or that they could have taken part in any united 
action at this period. In fact, every indication we have 
points to the conclusion that it was from a king of 
Larsa that Sin-muballit captured Isin in the seven- 
teenth year of his reign.^ Three years previously the 
date-formula for his fourteenth year commemorated 
his defeat of the army of Ur, and there are good 

1 Cf. ''Chronicles," II., p. 18 f. 

« Cf. Winckler, "Orient. Lit.-Zelt.," 1007, col. 585 f., and Hrozny, 
" Wiener Zeitschrift," Bd. 21 (1908), p. 382. But Winckler and_ Hronzy in 
their rendering ignore the fact that in these late chronicles "son " is always 
expressed by tur (mdru), never by a (aphi). 

3 See Ungnad, "Zeits. fur Assyr./' XXIII., pp. 78 ff. 

* Confirmation of this view has now been obtained. I learn from M. 
Thureau-Dangin that he has found a variant date for the tenth year of Samsu- 
iluna, which mentions not only the cities of Erech and Isin but also the land 
of lamutbal (cf. " Journal asiatique," 1909, pp. 335 ff. 

3 See Delitzsch, "Beitr. zur Assyr./' IV., p. 40Gf., and Thureau-Dangiu, 
"Orient. Lit.-Zeit./' 1907, col. 256 f. 


grounds for believing that Ur was acting at this time 
with the army of the king of Larsa. For certain 
tablets are dated in the year in which Sin-muballit 
defeated the army of Larsa, and we may with some 
confidence regard this as a variant formula for the 
fourteenth year.' Thus, three years after his defeat of 
the king of Larsa, Sin-muballit followed up his success 
by capturing the city of I sin, which he commemorated 
in the formula for the seventeenth year. But he cannot 
have held it for long, for it must have been shortly 
retaken by Larsa, before being again recaptured in 
Hammurabi's seventh year.^ Thus, in less than eleven 
years, from the seventeenth year of Sin-muballit to the 
seventh year of Hammurabi, the city of Isin changed 
hands three times. We may therefore conclude that 
the date-formula for Sin-muballit 's seventeenth year, 
and those found upon the Tell Sifr tablets,^ did not 
commemorate the fall of the Dynasty of Isin in Damik- 
ilishu's reign, but were based upon two episodes in the 
struggle for that city, which took place at a later date, 
between the kings of Larsa and of Babylon. 

In view of the importance of the question, we have 
treated in some detail the evidence that has been 
adduced in favour of the theory, that the later kings 
of Isin were contemporaneous with the earlier rulers 
of Babylon. It wdll have been seen that the difficulties 
involved by the suggested synchronism between Damik- 
ilishu and Sin-muballit are too grave to admit of its 
acceptance, while they entirely disappear on referring 
the disputed date-formulas to their natural place in the 

^ See Tliurean-Dangin, op. cit., col. 25G, and King, "Hammurabi," III., 
p. 229, u. 41. The only other possible year in Sin-muballi^s reign would be 
the twentieth, the formula for which is broken on the principal date-list A ; 
I have made a fresh examination of the tablet, and the slight traces preserved 
at the beginning of the line do not suggest this restoration, though it is 

2 See King, "Hammurabi," HI., p. 2^50 f., and "Chronicles," I., p. 166. 
Tlie traces on the date-list D suggest that the formula for this year records 
tlie destruction and not the building of the wall of Isin. This is now put 
beyond a doubt by the formula upon a contract of Hammurabi's reign dated 
in the year of his capture of f]rech and Isin (see Thureau-Dangin, "Orient. 
Lit.-Zeit./' 1!)07, col. 257, u. 2). 

3 It should be added that tlic local system of dating tablets at Tell Sifr 
was not necessarily continuous. If the city ever changed hands, the con 
queror would re-introduce his own date-formulae, as Ave have seen was done 
by Samsu-iluna. 


struggle between Babylon and I^arsa. This does not 
preclude the possibility that the dynasties may have 
overlapped for a shorter period than ninety-nine years. 
But in view of the total absence of any information on 
the point, it is preferable to retain the view that the 
l^abylonian monarchy was not established before the 
close of the Dynasty of Isin.^ Whatever troubles may 
have befallen Isin after Ur-Ninib's family had ceased to 
reign, there is no doubt that under her last two kings 
the city's influence was re-established, and that she 
exercised control over Babylon itself. In the course 
of the German excavations, a clay cone has been found 
in the temple E-patutila at Babylon, bearing a votive 
inscription of Sin-magir, the fifteenth king of Isin ; 
and this was evidently dedicated by him as a votiAc 
offering in his character of suzerain of the city.^ JNIore- 
over, in this text he lays claim to the rule of Sumer 
and Akkad. Akkad, as well as Sumer, was also held 
by his son Damik-ilishu, who succeeded him upon the 
throne. For a tablet has been found at Abu Habba, 
dated in the year in which Damik-ilishu built the wall 
of Isin,' and the date upon a tablet from Nippur 
commemorates his building of the temple of Shamasli, 
named E-ditar-kalama, which was probably in l^abylon.'* 
Thus both Sippar and Babylon were subject to the city 
of Isin under the last of her rulers, who, like his 
father before him, maintained an effective hold upon 
the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad. 

With the rise of Babylon we reach the beginning 
of a new epoch in the history of the two countries. 
The seat of power now passes finally to the north, 
and, through the long course of her troubled history, 

* While the later kings of Isin were suzerains of Bahyloii, there is little 
doubt that the earlier kings of IJabylon controlled, not only their own city, 
but a considerable part of Akkad. 'Ilius from the date-formulae of Sumu-abu, 
the founder of the First Dynasty, we gather that his authority was recognized 
at Dilbat and at Kish, and that he was strong enough to undertake the con- 
quest of Kazallu in his thirteenth year ; moreover a contract, probably from 
Sippar, is dated in his reign (cf. King, "Hammurabi," III., p. 212 f., and 
Thureau-Dangin, " Journal des savants,^' 1908, p. 200). 

2 Cf. Weissbach, " Babylonische Miscellen," p. 1. 

3 Cf. Scheil, 'Rec. de'trav.," XXIII., p. 94, and " Une saison de fouillcs 
a Sippar," p. 140. 

* See Hilprecht, "Math., Met., and Chron. Tablets," p. 49 f., n. 6. 


the city of l}a})ylon Avas never dislodged from her 
position as the capital. Foreign inA asions might result 
in the fall of dynasties, and her kings might be drawn 
from other cities and lands, but Babylon continued to 
be the centre of their rule. Moreover, after the fresh 
wave of immigration whicli resulted in the establish- 
ment of her First Dynasty, the racial character of 
Babylonia became dominantly Semitic. Before the 
new invaders the Sumerians tended to withdraw south- 
wards into the coastal districts of the Persian Gulf, 
and from here, for a time, an independent dynasty, 
largely of Sumerian origin, attempted to contest ^vitli 
Babylon her supremacy. But w^ith the fall of Isin the 
political career of the Sumerians as a race may be 
regarded as closed. Their cultural influence, however, 
long survived them. In the spheres of art, literature, 
religion, and law they left behind them a legacy, which 
was destined to mould the jcivilization of the later 
inhabitants of the country, and through them to exert 
an influence on other and more distant races. 




IN the preceding pages we have followed the history 
of the Sunierian race from the period of its earliest 
settlement in Babylonia until the time when its 
political power was drawing to a close. The gradual 
growth of the state has been described, from the first 
rude settlements around a series of ancient cult-centres, 
through the phase of highly developed but still inde- 
pendent city-states, to a united kingdom of Sumer and 
Akkad, based on ideals inherited from the Semitic 
Nortli. We have traced the inter-relations of North 
and South, of Sumerians and Semites, and have watched 
their varying fortunes in the racial conflict which bulks 
so largely in the history of the two countries. Points 
have also been noted at which contact with other lands 
can be historically proved, and it has thus been found 
possible to estimate the limits of the kingdoms wliicli 
were established in Sumer or Akkad during the later 
periods. Of foreign lands which came into direct 
relationship with Babylonia, Elam plays by far the 
most conspicuous part. In the time of the city-states 
she invades the land of Sumer, and later on is in her 
turn conquered by Akkadian and Sunierian kings. 
The question naturally arises, how far this close poli- 
tical contact affected the cultural development of the 
two countries, and suggests the further query as to what 
extent their civilizations were of common origin. 

Another region which figures in the list of con- 
quered countries is Amurru, or the " Western Land," 
and an attempt must be made to trace tlie paths of 

321 y 


Babylonian influence beyond the limits of Syria, and 
to ascertain its effects within the area of Aegean 
culture. The later trade routes were doubtless already 
in existence, and archaeological research can often detect 
evidence of cultural connection, at a time when there 
is no question of any political contact. TNIoreover, in 
spite of the absence of Neolithic settlements in Baby- 
lonia, and the comparatively advanced state of culture 
which characterizes the earliest of Sumerian sites, it is 
possible that contact with other and distant races had 
already taken place in prehistoric times. One of the most 
fascinating problems connected with the early history of 
Sumer concerns the relationship which her culture bore 
to that of Egypt. On this point recent excavations 
have thrown considerable light ; and, as the suggested 
connection, whether direct or indirect, must admittedly 
have taken place in a remote age, it will be well to 
attack this problem before discussing the relationship of 
Sumer to the other great centres of ancient civilization. 
Although no direct contact between Babylonia and 
Egypt has been proved during the earlier historical 
periods, the opinion has been very generally held that 
the Egyptian civiUzation was largely influenced in its 
first stages by that of Babylonia. The use of the 
stone cylinder-seal by the Egyptians certainly furnished 
a very cogent argument in favour of the view that 
some early cultural connection must \vd\e taken place ; 
and, as the cylinder-seal was peculiarly characteristic 
of Babylonia during all periods, whereas its use was 
gradually discontinued in Egypt, the inference seemed 
obvious that it was an original product of Babylonia, 
whence it had reached Egypt in late predynastic or 
early dynastic times. This view appeared to find 
support in other points of resemblance which were 
noted between the early art and culture of the two 
countries. JVlace-heads of bulbous or " egg-shaped " 
form were employed by the early inhabitants of both 
lands. The Egyptian slate carvings of the First 
Dynasty were compared with the early basreliefs and 
engraved seals of the Sumerians, and resemblances 
were pointed out both in subject-matter and in the sym- 
metrical arrangement of the designs. The employment 

•M u 


of brick, in place of stone, as a building material, 
was regarded as due to Babylonian inHiience ; and the 
crenelated walls of Early Eg}^ptian buildings, the exis- 
tence of which was proved not only by pictured 
representations on the slate carvings, but also by the 
remains of actual buildings such as the mastaba-tomb 
of King Aha at Nakada, and the ancient fortress of 
Abydos, known as the Shunet ez-Zebib, were treated 
as borrowed from Sumerian originals. That irrigation 
was practised on the banks of the Nile as well as in the 
Euphrates valley, and that wheat was grown in both 
countries, were cited as additional proofs that Babylonia 
must have exercised a marked influence on Egyptian 
culture during the early stages of its development. 

In order to explain such resemblances between the 
early cultures of Sumer and Egypt, it was necessary to 
seek some channel by which the influence of the former 
country could have reached the valley of the Nile ; and 
a solution of the problem was found in the theory of a 
Semitic invasion of Upper Eg^-^pt towards the end of 
the predynastic period. That a Semitic element existed 
in the composition of the ancient Egyptian language 
is established beyond dispute ; and this fact was com- 
bined with the Egyptian legends of their origin on the 
Red Sea coast, and with the situation of the predynastic 
and early dynastic cemeteries in Upper Egypt, in sup- 
port of the theory that Semitic tribes, already imbued 
with Sumerian culture, had reached the Nile from the 
shore of the Red Sea by way of the Wadi Hammamat. 
According to this view the Neolithic and predynastic 
population of Egypt was of a different race to the early 
dynastic Egyptians. The former were regarded as in- 
digenous to the country, speaking a language possibly 
akin to the Berber dialects of North Africa. With 
little or no knowledge of metal, they were pictured as 
offering a stubborn but unsuccessful resistance to their 
Semitic conquerors. The latter were assumed to have 
brought with them a copper age culture, ultimately 
derived from the Sumerians of Babylonia. Crossing 
from southern Arabia by the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb, 
and making their way northward along the western shore 
of the Red Sea, they would have reached the Nile in the 


neighbourhood of Koptos. Here they would have formed 
their first settlements, and, after subduing the older in- 
habitants of Upper Egypt, they would hiivc pushed their 
way northwards along the valley of the Nile.' 

There is no doubt tliat the union of Upper and 
Lower Egypt into a smgle monarchy, traditionally 
as(?ribed to Mena, the legendary founder of the first 
Egyptian dynasty, did result from a conquest of the 
North by the South. Mena himself was regarded as 
sprung from a line of local rulers established at This, or 
Thinis, in the neighbourhood of Abydos, and also as the 
founder of Memphis at the head of the Delta, whither 
he transferred his throne. Further traces of the con- 
quest of the North by the South have been preserved 
in the legends concerning the followers of Horus, the 
patron deity of the first Idngs of Upper Egypt. The 
advance of the Sky-god of Edfu with his Mesniu or 
" Smiths," ^ who are related to have won battle after 
battle as they pressed northwards, is amply confirmed 
by the early dynastic monuments that have been re- 
covered by excavation. The slate carving of Narmer, 
on which is portrayed the victory of Horus over the 
kingdom of the Harpoon near the Canopic branch of 
the Nile, may well represent one of the last decisive 
victories of the Horus-worshippers, as they extended 
their authoritv nortiiwards to the sea.^ Of the historical 

* For discussions of the merits of the theory, in view of the admitted 
resemblance of certain features in tlie civilizations of Babylonia and Egypt, 
see King and Hall, "Egypt and Western Asia," pp. 32 ff. , and Sayce, "The 
Archaeology of tlie Cuneiform Inscriptions ; '' cf. also J)e Morgan, " Les 
j)remieres civilizations," pp. 170 fF. The publication of the results obtained 
by Dr. Reisner's prolonged diggings, supplemented by the more recent work 
of M. Naville at Abydos, has considerably increased the material on which 
a more definite decision can be based. I may add that Mr. Hall agrees with 
me as to the necessity of modifying many points in the theory, in consequence 
of the additional information that has recently become available for use. It 
should be noted that in iiis " Oldest Civilization of Greece,'^ p. 179, ii. 1, he 
had already empliasized the indigenous origin of much of Egyptian culture ; 
cf. also " Egypt and \\'estern Asia,^' p. 45 f. 

2 As a subsidiary meaning, tlie word possibly conveys the idea of soldiers 
armed with dagger and lance ; see Maspero, " liiblioliieque Egyptologique," 
II., pp. yi3 ff. On the walls of the temple of Edfu the Mesniu are repre- 
sented as holding in the left hand a kind of dagger, and in the right a light 
dart tipped with metal. The important ])ait played by metal in their :irma- 
nient is emphasized by these late reprcsenUitions, as bj the name assigned them 
iu tlie Legend of Edfu. Tlicy itore tlie same relation to their patron deity 
as the Sliemsu-IJor, or '' Followers of Horus," bore to him in his other aspect 
as the son of Isis. ^ (^'f- Newberry, " Amials of Archaeology,'' pp. 17 ff. 



character of this conquest of Lower Egypt by tlie kings 
of the South, which resulted in the union of the whole 
country under a single monarchy, there are now no two 
opinions. The point, about which some uncertainty 
still exists, concerns the racial character of the con- 
querors and the origin of their higher culture, by virtue 
of which their victories were obtained. 

On the hypothesis of a Semitic invasion, the higher 
elements in the early culture of Egypt are, as we 
have seen, to be traced to a non-Egyptian source. The 
Semitic immigrants are assumed to have introduced, 
not only the use of metal, but also a knov/ledge of 
letters. The Sumerian system of writing has been 
regarded as the parent of the Egyptian hieroglyphic 
characters ; and comparisons have been made between 
the names of Sumerian and Egyptian gods.^ The sug- 
gestion has also been put forward that the fashion of 
extended burial, which in Egypt gradually displaced 
the contracted position of the corpse, was also to be 
traced to Babylonian influence. 

It must be admitted that, until quite recently, this 
view furnished a very plausible explanation of the 
various points of resemblance noted between the civili- 
zations of the two countries. Moreover, the evidence 
obtained by excavation on early sites certainly appeared 
to show a distinct break between the predynastic and 
early dynastic cultures of Egypt. To account for what 
seemed so sudden a change in the character of Egyptian 
civihzation, the theory of a foreign invasion seemed 
almost inevitable. But the publication of the results 
of Dr. Reisner's excavations at Naga-ed-Der and other 
early cemeteries in Upper Egypt,^ has rendered it 

' ITie most striking of these comparisons is that of Asari, a Sumerian g-OfI 
who was afterwards identified with Marduk, and Asar, the Egyptian fjod 
Osiris. For not only is there identity of name-sound, but there is also a 
resemblance between the Egyptian and Sumerian sign-groups for the names 
(cf. Sayce, "The Archaeology of the Cimeiform Inscriptions," p. 110). 'J"he 
resemblance, however, is not quite so close as it is sometimes represented, for 
the Sumerian sign eri or urn is invariably employed for "city,'^a meaning 
which never attaches to as, the character in the corresponding half of the 
Egyptian group. To regard the resemblance as other than a coincidence, it 
is necessary to assume a very close relationship between the early religious 
ideas of Sumer and Egypt, an assumption that would only be justified by tlie 
strongest proofs of connection from the archaeological side. 

^ See Reisner, " The Early Dynastic Cemeteries of Naga-ed-Der," Part I., 
published as Vol. II. of the '' University of California Publications," 1908. 


necessary to revise the theory ; wliile the still more 
recent diggings of M. Naville at Abydos prove that the 
changes, in certain districts, were even more gradual 
than had been supposed. 

Put briefly, Dr. Reisner's conclusion is that there 
was no sudden break of continuity between the Neolithic 
and early dynastic cultures of Egypt. His extensive 
and laborious comparison of the predynastic burials with 
those of the First and Second Dynasties, has shown 
that no essential change took place in the Egyptian 
conception of the life after death, or in the rites and 
practices which accompanied the interment of the body. 
In early dynastic as in Neolithic times the body of the 
dead man was placed in a contracted position on its left 
side and with the head to the south, and the grave was 
still furnished with food, arms, tools, and ornaments. 
Moreover, the changes observable in the construction 
of the grave itself, and in the character of the objects 
within it, were not due to the sudden influence of any 
alien race, but may well have been the result of a 
gradual process of improvement in the technical skill of 
the Egyptians themselves. 

The three most striking points of difference beween 
the products of the predynastic and dynastic periods 
centre round the character of the pottery and vessels 
for household use, the material employed for tools and 
weapons, and the invention of writing. It would now 
appear that the various changes were all gradually 
introduced, and one period fades into another without 
any strongly marked line of division between them. A 
knowledge of copper has always been credited to the 
later predynastic Egyptians, and it is now possible to 
trace the gradual steps by which the invention of a 
practical method of working it was attained. Copper 
ornaments and objects found in graves earlier than the 
middle predynastic period are small and of little practical 
utility, as compared with the beautifully flaked flint 
knives, daggers, and lances, which still retained the 
importance they enjoyed in purely Neolithic times. At 
a rather later stage in the predynastic period copper 
dagger-blades and adzes were produced in imitation of 
flint and stone forms, and these mark the transition to 


the heavy wecapons and tools of copper, which in the 
early dynastic period largely ousted flint and stone 
implements for practical use. 

The gradual attainment of skill in the working of 
copper ore on the part of the early Egyptians had a 
marked effect on the whole status of their culture. 
Their imp^o^'ed weapons enabled them by conquest to 
draw their raw materials from a far more extended area ; 
and the adaptation of copper tools for quarrying blocks 
of stone undoubtedly led to its increased employment 
as a stronger and more permanent substitute for clay. 
The use of the copper chisel also explains the elaborate 
carvings upon the early dynastic slates, and the invention 
of the stone borer brought about the gradual displace- 
ment of pottery in favour of stone vessels for household 
purposes. Thus, while metal-casting and stone-working 
improved, they did so at the expense of the older arts of 
flint-knapping and the manufacture of pottery by hand, 
both of which tended to degenerate and die out. Dr. 
Reisner had already inferred that for ceremonial pur- 
poses, as distinct from the needs of everyday life, both 
flint implements and certain earlier types of pottery 
continued to be employed. And M. Na\ ille's diggitigs 
at Abydos, during the season of 1909-10, seem to prove 
that the process was even slower and less uniform than 
had been thought possible. In fact, according to the 
excavators, it would appear that in certain districts in 
Egypt a modified form of the predynastic culture, usuig 
the characteristic red and black pottery, survived as late 
as the Sixth Dynasty ; while it is known that in Nubia 
a type of pottery, closely akin to the same prehistoric 
ware, continued in use as late as the Eighteenth Dynasty.^ 
However such survivals are to be explained, the begin- 
ning of the dynastic period in Egypt does not appear to 
present a break in either racial or cultural continuity. 
Indeed, a precisely parallel development may be traced 
between the early dynastic period, and that represented 
by the Third and Fourth Dynasties, when there is no 
question of any such break. As the stone vessels of the 

1 Cf. Maciver and Woollcy, " Areika," pp. 14 ff. Mr. Maciver also cites 
the occurrence of a similar black-topped red-ware on sites in iifrypt, dated 
between the Twelfth and Eighteenth Dynasties {op. cit.,i^. 16). 


first two dynasties had proved themselves superior to 
hand-made pottery for practical purposes, so they in 
turn were displaced by wheel-made pottery.^ These 
changes may be traced to gradual improvements 
in manufacture ; arts such as mat-weaving and bead- 
making, which were unaffected by the new inventions, 
continued to be practised without change in the early 
dynastic as in the predynastic periods. 

Recent archaeological research thus leaves small 
room for the theory that Egyptian culture was subjected 
to any strong foreign influence in early dynastic times, 
and its conclusions on this point are confirmed by 
anatomical evidence. The systematic measurement 
and comparison of skulls from ])redynastic and dynastic 
burials, which have been conducted by Dr. Elliot Smith 
of the Khedivial School of Medicine in collaboration 
with the Hearst Expedition, has demonstrated the lineal 
descent of the dynastic from the predynastic Egyptians. 
The two groups to all intents and purposes represent 
the same people, and in the later period there is no 
trace of any new racial element, or of the admixture of 
any foreign strain. Thus the theory of an invasion of 
Egypt by Semitic tribes towards the close of the pre- 
dynastic period must be given up, and, although this 
does not in itself negative the possibility of Sumerian 
influence having reached Egypt through channels of 
commercial intercourse, it necessitates a more careful 
scrutiny of the different points of resemblance between 
the cultures of the two countries on which the original 
theory was founded. 

One of the subjects on which the extreme upholders 
of the theory have insisted concerns the invention of the 
Egyptian system of ^^Titing, which is alleged by them 
to have been borrowed from Babylonia. But it must 
be noted tliat those signs which correspond to one 
another in the two systems are such as would naturally 
be identical in any two systems of pictorial writing, 
developed independently but under similar conditions. 
The sun all the world over would be represented by a 
circle, a mountain by a rough outline of a mountain 
peak, an ox by a horned head, and so on. To prove 

' See Reisner, " Naga-ed-Der," I., p. 133 f. 


any connection between the two systems a resenibbince 
should be estabhshed lietween the more conventioniihzcd 
signs, and here the comparison breaks down completely. 
It should further be noted that the Egy])tian system 
has reached us in a I'ar more primitive state than tliat 
of Babylonia. A\^hile the hieroglyphic signs are actual 
pictures of the objects represented, even the earliest 
line-characters of Sumer are so conventionalized that 
their original form would scarcely have been recognized, 
had not their meaning been already known. In fact, no 
example of Sumerian writing has yet been recovered 
which could have furnished a pattern for the Egyptian 

Moreover, the appearance of writing in Egypt was 
not so sudden an event as it is often represented. The 
buff-coloured pottery of predynastic times, with its red 
line decoration, proves that the Eygptian had a natural 
fticulty for drawing men, animals, plants, boats and 
conventional designs. In these picture-drawings of 
the predynastic period we may see the basis of the 
hieroglyphic system of writing, for in them the use of 
symbolism is already developed. The employment of 
fetish emblems, or symbols, to represent the different 
gods,^ is in itself a rough form of ideographic expression, 
and, if developed along its own lines, would naturally 
lead to the invention of a regular ideographic form of 
writing. There is little doubt that this process is what 
actually took place. The first impetus may have been 
given by the necessity for marks of private ownership, 
and by the need for conveying authority from the chief 
to his subordinates at a distance. Symbols for tlie 
names of rulers and of places would thus soon be added 
to those for the gods, and when a need was felt to 
commemorate some victory or great achievement of 
the king, such symbols would naturally be used in 
combination. This process may be traced on the earlier 
monuments of the First Dynasty, the records on wliich 
are still practically ideographic in character. A very 

^ For discussions of the 
the dynastic period, see 

Foucart, " Comptes rendi , , a: 

Der," p. 125 ; cf. also Legge, " Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," XXXI., pp. 205 ff. 


similar process doubtless led to the invention of the 
cuneiform system, and there is no need to assume that 
either Egypt or Babylonia was indebted to the other 
country for her knowledge of writing. 

We obtain a very similar result in the case of other 
points of resemblance which have been cited to prove 
a close connection between the early cultures of the two 
countries. Considerable stress has been laid on a certain 
similarity, which the Egyptian slate carvings of the 
dynastic period bear to examples of early Sumerian 
sculpture and engraving. It is true that composite 
creatures are characteristic of the art of both countries, 
and that their arrangement on the stone is often 
" heraldic " and symmetrical. But the human-headed 
bull, tlie favourite monster of Sumerian art, is never 
found upon the Egyptian monuments, on which not 
only the natural beasts but also the composite creatures 
are invariably of an Egyptian or African character. 
The general resemblance in style has also been exag- 
gerated. To take a single instance, a comparison has 
frequently been made between the Stele of the Vultures 
and the broken slate carving in the British Museum, 
No. 20791.^ On the former vultures are depicted 
carrying off the limbs of the slain, and on the latter 
captives are represented as cast out into the desert to 
be devoured by birds and beasts of prey. But the style 
of the two monuments is very different, and the 
Egyptian is far more varied in character. In addition 
to a single vulture, we see a number of ravens, a hawk, 
an eagle, and a lion, all attracted by the dead ; and the 
arrangement of the composition and the technique 

^ For a reproduction and description of the slate carving-, see Legge, 
" Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," Vol. XXII., pi. vi ; of. also Vol. XXXI., p. 204 f. 
Whatever view be taken of the ceremonial purpose forwliich these slates were 
intended, it is clear that the carving: of slate was no new departure in Kfrypt 
at this period. Many of tlie practical slate palettes from Nakada, on some of 
which traces liave been found of the grinding of malachite and haematite for 
face-paint (cf. Petrie, " Naqada and Ballas/' p. 43), are carved in animal forms. 
It may be added tliat the colour-dishes for face or body-paint, which have 
been found at Fara, are quite distinct botli in form and material from the 
Egyptian slate palettes. 'Iliey are of alabaster, with divisions for separate 
paints, and usually stand on four feet (cf. Andra?, " Mitteil. der Deutsch. 
Orient-CJesellschaft," No. 17, p. 0) ; they thus form a closer parallel to the 
small conical vases of clay or stone, still enclosing paint, whicli have been 
found in the lowest stratum of the mound of Susa and belong to the period of 
its first settlement (cf. De Morgan, " Rev. d'Assyr.," VI., p. 5). 


itself are quite unlike Sumerian work. There is also no 
need to trace the symmetrical arrangement of other 
of the Egyptian compositions to Babylonian influence, 
for, given an oval plaque to decorate while leaving a 
circular space in the centre, a symmetrical arrangement 
would naturally arise. ^ 

Another Egyptian characteristic, also ascribed to 
Babylonian influence, is the custom of extended burial 
with mummification, which only begins to be met with 
during the Third and Fourth Dynasties. Since the 
dead are portrayed on the Stele of the Vultures as 
arranged in the extended position beneath the burial- 
mound,^ it was formerly assumed that this was the 
regular Sumerian practice ; and the contracted forms 
of burial, which had been found at Warka, JVIukayyar, 
Surghul, NifFer and other Babylonian sites, were usually 
assigned to very late periods. The excavations at Fara 
and Abu Hatab have corrected this assumption, and 
have proved that the Sumerian corpse was regularly 
arranged for burial in the contracted position, lying on 
its side.^ The apparent exception to this rule upon the 
Stele of the Vultures may probably be regarded as 
characteristic only of burial upon the field of battle. 
There it must often have been impossible to furnish 
each corpse with a grave to itself, or to procure the 
regular offerings and furniture which accompanied 
individual interment. The bodies were therefore 
arranged side by side in a common grave, and covered 
with a tumulus of earth to ensure their entrance into 
the under world. But this was clearly a makeshift 
form of burial, necessitated by exceptional circum- 
stances, and was not the regular Sumerian practice of 
the period.* Whatever may have given rise to the 

1 Cf. Meyer, "Geschichte des Altertums," Bd. I., lift. II., p. 107 f. 

' See the plate facing p. 138. ^ See above, pp. 26 fF. 

* It is also possible that to represent the contracted position of his corpses 
was beyond the power of Eannatum's sculptor. Moreover, the employment 
of a common grave beneath a tumulus upon the field of battle may 
possibly have been a modified survival of an earlier practice, its retention 
having been dictated by convenience. Although no instance of its occurrence 
has been noted during excavations in Babylonia, we find a very similar form 
of burial employed at Susa during the period of its first settlement. It would 
appear that the dead were there buried outside the earthern rampart which 
marked the city-wall, without any special order or direction, and not enclosed 
by matting, pot, or sarcophagus. The bodies were placed in a common flitch 


Egyptian change in burial customs, the cause is not to 
be sought in Babylonian influence. 

A further point, which has been cleared up by 
recent excavation on early Babylonian sites, concerns 
the crenelated form of building, which was formerly 
regarded as peculiarly characteristic of Sumerian archi- 
tecture of the early period and as ha^^ng influenced 
that of Egypt, It is now known that this form of 
external decoration is not met with in Babylonia before 
the period of Gudea and the kings of Ur. Thus, if 
any borrowing took place, it must have been on tlie 
Babylonian side. The employment of brick as a 
building material may also have been evolved in Egypt 
witliout any prompting from Babylonia, for the forms 
of brick employed are quite distinct in both countries. 
The peculiar plano-convex brick, which is characteristic 
of early Sumerian buildings, is never found in Egypt, 
where the rectangular oblong form was employed irom 
the earliest period.^ Thus many points of resemblance, 
which were formerly regarded as indicating a close 
cultural connection between the two countries, now 
appear to be far less striking than was formerly the 
case.^ Others, again, may be explained as due to 
Egyptian influence on Babylonian culture rather than 
as the result of the reverse process. For example, the 

and covered with earth, others being added from time to time beside or above 
them, so that sometimes four or five layers of skeletons are found super- 
imposed. That the corpses here were separately interred would seem to 
follow from the fact that each is accompanied by its own funerary offerings 
and furniture placed around the liead ; see De Morgan, "Rev. d'Assyr." 
Vol. VII., No. 1 (11)09), p. 4f. It may be added that the Sumerians, like' the 
predynastic and early dynastic Egyptians, did not embalm their dead. The 
use of oil and honey for this purpose (see King, "Babylonian Religion," 
p. 49 f.), the latter of which is ascribed to the Babylonians by Herodotus 
(I., 198), would seem to have been of comparatively late introduction, and 
suggested by the Egyptian processes of mummification. It is interesting to 
note that, according to the evidence obtained by M. Naville at Abydos during 
the season of 1909-10, the contracted form of burial survived in Egypt at least 
as late as the Sixth Dynasty. 

^ The use of a sun-dried brick made of Nile mud and chopped straw may 
well have been evolved by the Egyptians themselves. As to the original 
home of wheat there is little evidence, though it may be noted that traces of 
cultivated wlieat and barley were found in the earliest stratum at Anau in 
Russian Turkestan ; see Punipelly, "Explorations in Turkestan," p. 89 f. 

- Negative evidence also points in the same direction. For instance, the 
extensive use of ivory by the predynastic and dynastic Egyptians is in striking 
contrast to the fact that not a single object of ivory was found by M. de Sarzec 
at Tello. With the Sumerians its place was taken by shell ; see above, p. 78. 


resemblance that has been pointed out between Giidea's 
sculpture m the round and that of the Fourtli Dynasty 
in Egypt may not be fortuitous. For Gudea main- 
tained close commercial relations with the Syrian coast, 
where Egyptian influence at that time had long been 

There remains to be considered the use of the 
bulbous mace-head and of the stone cylindrical seal, 
both of which are striking characteristics of the early 
Egyptian and Sumerian cultures. It is difficult to 
regard these classes of objects, and particularly the 
latter, as having been evolved independently in Egypt 
and by the Sumerians. In Babylonia the cylinder-seal 
is already highly de\Tloped when found on the earliest 
Sumerian sites, and it would appear that the Sumerian 
immigrants brought it with them into the country, along 
with their system of writing and the other elements of 
their comparatively advanced state of civilization. 
Whether they themselves had evolved it in their 
original home, or had obtained it from some other race 
with whom they came into contact before reaching the 
valley of the Euphrates, it is still impossible to say. 
The evidence from Susa has not yet thrown much light 
upon this point. While some stone seals and clay 
sealings have been found in the lowest stratum of the 
mound, they are not cylindrical but in the form of flat 
stamps. The cyhndrical seal appears, however, to have 
been introduced at Susa at a comparatively early period, 
for examples are said to have been found in the group 
of strata representing the " Second Period," at a depth 
of from fifteen to twenty metres below the surface. 
The pubhshed material does not yet admit of any 
certain pronouncement with regard to the earliest 
history of the cylinder-seal and its migrations. In 
favour of the view that would regard it as an inde- 
pendent product of the early Egyptians, it may be 
noted that wood and not stone was the commonest 
material for cylinders in the earliest period," But if 

1 Against the view may be cited the gradual discontinuance of the 
cylinder in Egypt, suggestive of a foreign origin. Comparatively few 
wooden cylinder-seals have been recovered. The fact that wood and 
not stone was the favourite material has, however, been deduced from 
many of the seal-impressions, in which a raised line runs from top to 


the predynastic cylinder of Egypt is to be regarded as 
ultiiiiutely derived from Asia, the connection is to be 
set at a period anterior to the earhest Sumerian settle- 
ments that have yet been identified. 

Thus the results of recent excavation and research, 
both m Egypt and Babylonia, have tended to diminish 
rather than to increase the evidence of any close con- 
nection between the early cultures of the two countries. 
Apart from any Babylonian influence, there is, however, 
ample proof of a Semitic element, not only in the 
language, but also in the religion of ancient Egypt. 
The Egyptian sun-worship, which forms so striking a 
contrast to the indigenous animal-cults and worship 
of the dead, was probably of Semitic origin, and 
may either have reached Upper Egypt from Southern 
Arabia,' or have entered Lower Egypt by the eastern 
Delta. The latter region has always formed an open 
door to Egypt, and the invasion of the Hyksos may 
well have had its prototype in predynastic times. The 
enemies, whose conquest is commemorated on several 
of the early dynastic slate-carvings, are of non-Egyptian 
type ; they may possibly have been descendants of such 
Semitic immigrants, unless they were Libyan settlers 
from the west. In the historic period we have evidence 
of direct contact between Syria and Egypt at the time 
of the Third Dynasty, for the Palermo Stele records 
the arriA'al in Egypt of forty ships laden with cedar- 
wood in Sncferu's reign. These evidently formed an 
expedition sent by sea to the Lebanon, and we may 
assume that Sneferu's predecessors had already extended 
their influence along the Syrian coast.^ It is in Syria 
that we may also set the first contact between the 

bottom across the si^ns. This can only have been produced by a split 
in the wood of vvliich the cylinder was composed ; cf. Petrie, " lloyal Tombs," 
I., p. 27, and Newberry, "Scarabs," p. 4B. The earliest form of cylinder- 
seal may well have been a piece of notched reed. 

' If the land of Punt may be set in Abyssinia and Somaliland, it is 
possible that it formed a secondary centre of Semitic influence in this region ; 
cf. King and Hall, " Egypt and Western Asia," p. 40. 

2 See Meyer, " Goc'liichte," Bd. I., Hft. II., pp. 155, 102, 393 f. ; and 
cf. Breasted, "Ancient Records," I., p. GO. According to Schiifer's transla- 
tion, the forty ships were made of cedar-wood, not loaded with it (see "Ein 
Bruchstiick altagyptischer Annalen," p. 30). But this does not affect the 
inference drawn from the passagx;, for the cedar must have been obtained in 
Lcl)anon, and the record in any case proves a connection between Egypt and 
Syria in Sneferu's reign. 


civilizations of Egypt and Babylonia in historic times. 
The early Sumerian ruler Lugal-zaggisi boasts that he 
reached the INlediterranean coast, and his expedition 
merely formed the prelude to the conquest of Syria 
by Shar-Gani-sharri of Akkad/ It has indeed been 
suggested that evidence of Egyptian influence, follow- 
ing on the latter's Syrian campaign, is to be seen 
in the deification of early Babylonian kings.^ And 
althougli this practice may now be traced with greater 
probability to a Sumerian source,^ there can be little 
doubt that from Shar-Gani-sharri 's reign onwards Syria 
formed a connecting-link between the two great civili- 
zations on the Euphrates and the Nile. 

Far closer than her relations with Egypt were tlie 
ties which connected Babylonia with the great centre 
of civilization which lay upon her eastern frontier. In 
the course of this history reference has frequently been 
made to the contact which was continually taking place 
from the earliest historical period between Elam and 
the Sumerian and Semitic rulers of Sumer and Akkad. 
Such political relationships were naturally accom- 
panied by close commercial intercourse, and the effects 
of Sumerian influence upon the native culture of Elam 
have been fully illustrated by the excavations conducted 
at Susa by the "Delegation en Perse,"* Situated on 
the river Kerkha, Susa occupied an important strategic 
position at the head of the caravan routes which con- 
nected the Iranian plateau with the lower valley of the 
Tigris and Euphrates and the shores of the Persian 
Gulf. Th^ river washed the foot of the low hills on 
which the town was built, and formed a natural defence 
against attack from the west. The situation of the 
city on the left bank of the stream is an indication that 
even in the earliest period its founders sought to protect 
themselves from the danger of sudden raids from the 
direction of Sumer and Akkad. The earliest Sumerian 
records also reflect the feelings of hostility to Elam 
which animated their writers. But from these scattered 

1 See above, pp. 197 f., 233 f. 

2 See Thureau-Dangiu, " Recueil de travaux,'' XIX., p. 187. 
^ See above, p. 273 f. 

* See De Morffan, " Recherches archdologiques," published as the first, 
seventh, and eighth volumes of the "Me'moires de la Dt^legatiou en Perse." 


references it would appear that the Elamites at this 
time were generally the aggressors, and that they 
succeeded in keeping their country free from any 
political interference on the part of the more powerful 
among the Sumerian city-states. It was not until the 
period of Semitic expansion, under the later kingdom of 
Kish and the empire of Akkad, that the country became 
dominated by Babylonian influence. 

We could not have more striking evidence of the 
extent to which Elam at this time became subject to 
Semitic culture than in the adoption of the Babylonian 
character and language by the native rulers of the 
country. ^Ve are met with the strange picture of 
native patesis of Susa and governors of Elam record- 
ing their voti\e offerings in a foreign script and 
language, and making invocations to purely Babylonian 
deities.^ The Babylonian script was also adopted for 
writing inscriptions in the native Elamite tongue, and 
had we no other evidence available, it might be urged 
that the use of the Semitic language for the votive 
texts was dictated by purely temporary considerations 
of a political character. There is no doubt, however, 
that the Semitic conquest of Elam was accompanied, 
and probably preceded, by extensive Semitic immigra- 
tion. Even at the time of the Dynasty of Ur, when 
Elam was subject to direct Sumerian control, the 
Semitic influence of Akkad had become too firmly 
rooted to be displaced, and it received a fresh impetus 
under the later rulers of the First Dynasty of Babylon. 
The clay tablets of a commercial and agricultural 
character, dating from the period of Adda-Pakshu," are 
written in the Babylonian character and language,^ like 
those found at Mai- Amir to the east of Susa.* The 

^ Tlie manner in which the Semitic culture of Babylonia persisted in 
iufluencinfT that of Elam in the relij^ous sphere is well illustrated by the 
bronze votive plaque of Shilkliak-In-Shusliinak, recently found at Susa ; 
cf. Gautier, " Rec. de trav.,'' XXXI., pp. 41 ff. It is termed a " Sit-Shamshi," 
and probably represented a rite of purification which was performed at 
sunrise. As its title would seem to imply, the rite liad been bodily taken 
over by the Elamites and incorporated along with its Semitic name into the 
native ritual. 

* See above, p. 30G f. 

3 Cf. Scheil, "Textcs Elam-SJmit.," JV., pp. 14 ff. 

* "Textes Elam-S^mit./' II., pp. 169 ff. 


counti-v ruJ A-f ,^';.''y Ionian mHuence n the 
char" ethers wh Vh ™ *'"' ^°''"" "'^ ^^^ Babylonian 
kb™ for the FliT''' f'"Pl«yed by the Aehaemenian 

-rhl A ^ ^ *''*<'^'^ *° " comparatively late oriai , 
Ihe development of the writing exhibited by Ue 
Neo-Anzanite texts may be connected with the mtion ,1 
revival wh,d. characterized the later Elamfte nJ d y 

at Su^a and Tt?' ^"'^^"^ > '^' inscriptions found 
at busa and other sites in Elam is supported by the 
archaeologiea discoveries in proving that^om the^ti ne 
d veLmeT^f "^fP "' ^''f -^ ^kkad, the cult^rd 

workmansh n th»f 1 '" ^t' P'°''""''* °^"^«^<= ^lamite 
cootfof R^L^ ■"■" ^'? recovered are no slavish 

of'^Z. f ^ "J"'"'" o"g'nals, and the earher examples 
dfst nc ^ f ■■' """^ ^nfaving are of a character qS te 
distmct from anything found on Babylonian soil' 

art Ekm' '" *'.'V"'*'"^ °^ ™^'''' ""^ '" the jevelTe t' 

even n the iT^'" *'"?' ?''^"''' ''"=■■ "^'ghbour.^ and. 
even m the later periods, her art presenti itself as of 

ofrbut^dT'-' '""r'"^'' '* '^ *™^ "^y ^''-t °f «aby 
nmel'v n V ""^ '*' V™?^*"** ''"d inspiration from 

puiely native sources. It is also significant that the 
earlier the remains that have been recovered the less do 
they betray any trace of foreign influence. 

archMlo»i„„es," II pi T A Yn SI . ''^ »/ Mo"-«^", "Recherches 
half.mau and half-beast wW k h.l ' '"'"°"="' »' *e mythological beii.g, 
early work of Si'mer or Akkad TI,L°t^,-^ 'T'' ,'Tl '5 ''■''"'"' ""'''"' *e 
iufluonce, the Ela.iiile LnlnS, ,„ V- ' ?.''""= °/ «»l'yl""'a.i and Assyr 
from such a L.l ',\f,!fc™"".','?<"' '".."''l" "' individuality i, ll 

and Assyrian 



' -•» r- x'l 

1 hey date from the period of 


Shutruk-Xakhkhunte and hotl. ^J" • '""""^i ^¥>' ^"*^ ^^«'" *''« P^noc 
casting yet found fn ^hvlnn , rf,'^" and teclinique surpass any bro 
purines fa.shS if S^inT ^^ ''^''f^ ornaments, jewellery, and 
" Kech. arc ■■ Tl nn^65 ff''^:?'' 'V'' ^'J'; P'%^''Ou, stones, pubh-.shed in 
temple of Shu.hinak^at Sn a ^ ^K ^- ?»/ ," f«"ndation offerings " from the 
Elamite metalwork it i. diS' u. ^T"^*'^"^- «P«^'°^«»s «f the finer class of 
disorder Tn wS theV wtf S^' *^. determme their date accurately, but the 

foundation-drpos't Ind differtnl *'"' ^^"','?l* i**^" *^"^'->' "^ « ^'"'^1« 

ueposit, ana different groups may well belong to different periods. 



A very striking proof of the independent develop- 
ment of Elamite culture prior to the Semitic conquest 
is now furnished by the texts inscribed in the so-called 
" proto-Elamite " system of writing/ The majority 
consist of small roughly-formed tablets of clay, and the 
signs upon them are either figures or ideographs for 
various objects. Though they have not been fully 
deciphered, it is clear that they are tablets of accounts 
and inventories. A very few of the signs, such as those 
for " tablet " and *' total," resemble the corresponding 
Babylonian characters, but the great majority are 
entirely different and have been evolved on a system of 
their own. Lapidary forms of the characters have been 
found in inscriptions accompanying Semitic texts of 
Basha-Shushinak ; ^ and, from the position of each upon 
the stone, it was inferred that the Semitic text was 
engraved first and the proto-Elamite section added to 
it. That they w^ere contemporary additions seemed 
probable, and this has now been put beyond a doubt by 
the discovery at Susa of a stone statuette seated upon a 
throne, which was dedicated to a goddess by Basha- 
Shushinak.^ On the front of the throne at each side of 
the seated figure is an inscription ; that on the left side 
is in Semitic, and that on the right in proto-Elamite 
characters. The one is obviously a translation of the 
other, and their symmetrical arrangement leaves no 
doubt that they were inscribed at the same time. 

It is therefore clear that at the time of Basha- 
Shushinak the two languages and scripts were sometimes 
employed side by side for votive inscriptions, while the 
clay tablets pro\'e that the native script had not yet 
been su])erseded for the purposes of everyday life. The 
" proto-Elamite " characters present very few parallel- 
isms to Babylonian signs, and those that do occur are 
clearly later accretions. Thus it would be natural 
enough to borrow the Babylonian sign for " tablet," at 
a time when the clay tablet itself found its way across 

» See Scheil, " Texles Elam.-Semit.," III., pp. 57 ff. 

2 See above, p. 280. 'Uhe lapidary forms of the characters are more 
linear and less ornate than those upon the tablets. But the differences are 
such as would naturally arise from the use of the harder material, and we 
may probably assifj^n botli classes to about the same period. 

■s See Scheil, "Rev. d'Assyr.," Vol. VI., p. 48. 


the border ; and, though the signs for " total " corre- 
spond, the Ehiniite figures difler and are based on a 
decimal, not on a sexigesimal system of numeration. 
It may tlierefore be inferred that the writing hatl no 
comiection in its origin witli that of the Sumerians, and 
was invented independently of the system employed 
during the earliest periods in Babylonia. It may have 
been merely a local form of writing and not in general 
use throughout the whole of Elam, but its existence 
makes it probable that the district in wliicli Susa was 
situated was not subject to any strong influence from 
Babylonia in the age preceding the Semitic expansion. 
This inference is strengthened by a study of the seal- 
impressions upon many of the tablets ; ' the designs 
consist of figured representations of animals and com- 
posite monsters, and their treatment is totally different 
to that found on early Sumerian cylinders. In the 
total disappearance of its local script C'appadocia offers 
an interesting parallel to Elam. The Hittite hiero- 
glyphs were obviously of purely native origin, but tliey 
did not survi^ e the introduction of the clay tablet and 
of cuneiform characters. 

The earlier strata of the mounds at Susa. which date 
from the prehistoric periods in the city's history, have 
proved to be in some confusion as revealed by the 
French excavations ; but an explanation has recently 
been forthcoming of many of the discrepancies in level 
that have previously been noted. "^ It would seem that 
the northern and southern extremities of the Citadel 
Tell were the most ancient sites of haljitation, and that 
from this cause two small hills were formed which per- 
sisted during the earlier periods of tlie city's liistory. 
In course of time the ground between them was 
occupied and was gradually filled in so that the earlier 
contour of the mound was lost. It thus liappens tliat 
while remains of the Kassite period are found in the 
centre of the tell at a depth of from fifteen to twenty 
metres, they occur at the two extremities in strata not 
more tlian ten metres below the surface. Even so, tlie 
later of the two prehistoric strata at the extremities of 

* Cf. Jequier, in " Rerherches arclieolotfiques," III., l>p. 7 tt. 
2 See De Morgan, '• Rev. d'Assyr.," V'L, p. 8. 


the mound, representing an epoch anterior to that of the 
'* proto-Elaniite " inscriptions, contains only scattered 
objects, and it is still difficult to trace the gradual evolu- 
tion of culture which took place in this and in the still 
earlier period. It should also be noted that the 
presence of a single stratum, enclosing remains of a 
purely Neolithic period, has not yet been established 
at Susa. Tliere is little doubt, however, that such a 
stratum at one time existed, for stone axes, arrow-heads, 
knives and scrapers, representing a period of Neolithic 
culture, are found scattered at every level in the mound. 
It is thus possible that, in spite of the presence of metal 
in the same stratum, much of the earlier remains 
discovered at Susa, and particularly the earlier forms 
of painted pottery,' are to be assigned to a Neolithic 
settlement upon the site. 

Fortunately for the study of the early ceramics of 
Elam, we have not to depend solely on the rather incon- 
clusive data which the excavations at Susa have as yet 
furnished. Digging has also been carried out at a group 
of mounds, situated about ninety-three miles to the 
west of Susa, whicli form a striking feature on the 
caravan route to Kermanshah. The central and most 
important of the mounds is known as the Tepe Mussian, 
and its name is often employed as a general designation 
for the group. The excavations conducted there in the 
winter of 1902-3 have brought to light a series of 
painted wares, ranging in date from a purely Neolithic 
period to an age in which metal was already beginning 
to appear.^ This wealth of material is valuable for com- 
parison with the very similar pottery from Susa, and has 
furnished additional data for determining the cultural 
connections of the earlier inhabitants of tlie country. 
The designs u])on the finer classes of painted ware, both 
at Susa and Mussian, are not only geometric in character, 
but include vegetable and animal forms. Some of the 
latter have been held to bear a certain likeness to designs 
which occur upon the later pottery of the predynastic 

' For coloured reproductions of Susiaii wares, see De Morgan, ' ' Itecherches 
arcli^ologiques," I., pi. xvii-xxii ; cf. also pp. lH',i fF. 

2 See Gauticr and I^ampre, " Fouilles de Moussian," in " Kecherches 
arclifiologiques," III., pp. 69 ff. 


age in Egypt, and it is mainly on the strength of such 
points of resemblance that M. de ^lorgan would trace 
a connection between the early cultures of the two 

But quite apart from objections based on the great 
difference of technique, the absence of any pottery 
similar to the Egyptian in Babylonia and Northern 
Syria renders it difficult to accept the suggestion ; and 
it is in other quarters that w^e may jiossibly recognize 
traces of a similar culture to that of the earlier aj^e in 
Elam. The resemblance between the more geometric 
designs upon the Elamite pottery and that discovered 
at Kara-Uyuk in Cappadocia has been pointed out by 
Professor Sayce ; "^ and JNIr. Hall has recently compared 
them in detail with very similar potsherds discovered 
by the Pumpelly Expedition at Anau in Russian 
Turkestan,^ and by Professor Garstang* at Sakjcgeu/i 
in Syria." It should be noted that, so far as Elam is 
concerned, the resemblance applies only to one class of 
the designs upon the early painted pottery, and does 
not include the animal and a majority of the \ egetable 
motives. It is sufficiently striking, however, to point 
the direction in which we may look for further light 

I See De Morgan. " Revue de I'Ecole d'Anthropologie,'' 11)07, p. 410 f. 
Still less convinciiijtf parallels are drawn between the early fultin-os of Crete 
and Elam by LagTanf^e in " La Crete ancienne/' pp. SOff. 

- bee "The Archaeology of the Cuneiform Inscriptions," p. 47. 

3 See Pumpelly, " E.xplorations in TurkesUin," Vol. II., Scimiidt's section 
on "The Archaeological E.xcavations," pp. 127 ff.; see further, p. 355. 

•* Cf. "The Annals of Archaeology," I., pp. 97 ff. 

5 See Hall, " Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," XXXI., pp. Oil ff. He also cites a 
general resemblance, which the.-^n three classes of pottery bear to the 
geometric designs on wares of the Neolitliic period from I'.oootia and Thessaly. 
On the strength of this resemblance Mr. Hall suggests tliat in Iran and in 
Northern Greece there may have been two closely related stone-using 
cultures, of which the former reached the age of metal at a much earlier 
period than the latter. He would, however, regard it as possible that the 
Neolitliic art of Northern Greece went back to 30*^)0 u.c. or even e.irlier. 
According to this view, the geometric and often polychrome ceramics found on 
prehistoric sites as widely separated as Elam, Transcaspia, Syria, Cappadocia, 
Cyprus, and Northern Greece would represent a development quite inde- 
pendent from that of the Aegean area, with which the early art of Egypt 
may possibly be connected. For a description of the pottery of Northern 
Greece, with figured examples and references to the recent literature, see 
the Reports of Wace, Droop, and Thompson in "Annals of Arrliacology," I., 
pp. 118 ff. It must be admitted that the suggested resemblaiu e between tlie 
early ceramics of Northern Greece and Western Asia is not so striking as 
that between the separate members of the latter group. 


upon the problem. Future excav.ations at Susa itself 
and on sites in Asia Minor will doubtless show how far 
we may press the suggested theory of an early cultural 

\¥hile such suggestions are still in a nebulous state, 
it would be rash to dogmatize on the relation of these 
prehistoric peoples to the Elamites of history. A study 
of the designs upon the Elamite potsherds makes it 
clear, however, that there was no sudden break between 
the cultures of the two periods. For many of the 
animal motives of a more conventionalized character 
are obviously derived from the peculiarly Elamite forms 
of composite monsters, which are reproduced in the seal- 
impressions upon " proto-Elamite " tablets.^ Moreover, 
it is stated that among the decorative motives on pot- 
sherds recently discovered in the lowest stratum at Susa 
are a number of representations of a purely religious 
character.^ It is possible that these will prove to be 
the ancestors of some of the sacred emblems which, 
after being developed on Elamite soil, reached Babylonia 
during the Kassite period.^ How far Babylonia partici- 
pated in the prehistoric culture of Elam it is difficult to 
say, since no Neolithic settlement has yet been identified 
in Sumer or Akkad. Moreover, the early Sumerian 
pottery discovered at Tello, which dates from an age 
when a knowledge of metal was already well advanced, 
does not appear to have resembled the prehistoric wares 
of Elam, either in composition or in design. It should 
be noted, however, that terra-cotta female figurines, of the 
well-known Babylonian type, occur in Elam and at Anau*; 
and it is possible that in Babylonia they were relics of 
a prehistoric culture. On sites in the alluvial portion 
of the country it is probable that few Neolithic remains 

^ Compare, for example, the animal motives from Mussian pottery, figured 
in " Recherches archeologiques," III., p. 134 f., Figs. 2G2-264, with" the half- 
human bull-monsters from "proto-Elamite" seal-impressions in Figs. 22-26, 
p. 11 f. 

2 See De Morgan, ''Rev. d'Assyr./' VI., p. 5. 

3 It is noteworthy that the "Greek cross," which is a very characteristic 
emblem on Kassite cvlinder-seals from Babylonia, and also occurs on the 
" proto-Jllamite " seal-impressions, is already met with as a decorative 
symbol on the early painted pottery of Susa and Mussian. It is also possible 
that the spear-headed emblem of tlie god Marduk was ultimately of Elamite 
origin ; it miglit well have been transferred to Marduk at the time of the 
Kassite kings of Babylon. * See below, p. 356. 



have been preserved.^ But it should be noted tluit 
fragments of painted pottery have been found at 
Kuyunjik, whieh bear a striking reseniblanee to the 
early Syro-Cappadocian Mare;'-* and these may wcW 
belong to a Neolithic settlement u])on the site of 
Nineveh/* It is thus possible that the })rehisl()rie 
culture, Avhieh had its seat in Elam, will be found to 
have extended to Southern Assyria also, and to non- 
alluvial sites on the borders of the Babylonian plain. 

It would seem that the influence of Sumerian 
culture during the historic period first began to be 
felt beyond the limits of Babylonia at the time of the 
Semitic expansion. The conquest of Syria by Shar- 
Gani-sharri undoubtedly had important results upon 
the spread of Babylonian culture. The record, which 
has been interpreted to mean that he went still further 
westw^ard and crossed the JMediterranean to Cyprus, is 
now proved to have been due to the misunderstanding 
of a later scribe.^ It is true that some seals have been 
found in Cyprus, which furnish evidence of Babylonian 
influence in the island, but they belong to a period 
considerably later than that of the Akkadian empire. Of 
these, the one said to have been found in the treasury 
of the temple at Curium by General di Cesnola refers 
to the deifled Naram-Sin,^ but the style of its compo- 
sition and its technique definitely prove that it is of 
Syro-Cappadocian workmanship, and does not date from 
a much earlier period than that of the First Dynasty of 
Babylon. The most cursory comparison of the seal 
wdth the elay-sealings of Naram-Sin's period, which 

^ See above, p. 2 f. 

2 See Myres, "The Early Pot-Fabrics of Asia Minor" in "'Hie Jonrnal of 
the Anthropolofrical Institute," Vol. XXXIll., p. 8?!^ I'rof. Myres would 
regard them as of Sargonid date, and it is true that some fragments of painted 
pottery of that period have been found at Kuyunjik. But the latter may be 
distinj2:uished, both by .subject and technique, from those which reproduce 
characteristics of the Cappadocian ware and are probably very much earlier 
(cf. Hall, " Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch./' XXXI., p. 313 f., n. 137). 

3 In the course of excavations at Kuyunjik, when sinking shafts into the 
lowest stratum just above the level of the plain, I came across obsidian 
implements and beds of ashes, indicating the existence of a Neolithic 

^ See above, p. 234 f. 

5 For a reproduction of the seal, see Sayce, "Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch.," 
Vol. v., p. 442. 


have been found at Tello,i will convince any one of this 
fact. The other, which was found in an early bronze 
age deposit at Agia Paraskevi with its original gold 
mounting, may be definitely dated in the j^eriod of the 
First 15abylonian Dynasty,^ and Nudubtum, its original 
owner, who styles himself a servant of the god JMartu 
(Amurru), may well have been of Syrian or West 
Semitic origin. Beyond such isolated cylinders, there 
is, however, no trace of early Babylonian influence in 
Cyprus.3 This is hardly compatible with the suggested 
Semitic occupation during Sliar-Gani-sharri's reign ; 
there may well have been a comparatively early trade 
connection with the island, but nothing more. 

Yet the supposed conquest of Cyprus by Shar-Gani- 
sharri has led to the wildest comparisons between 
Aegean and Babylonian art. Not content with leaving 
him in Cyprus, Professor Winckler has dreamed of still 
further maritime expeditions on his part to Rhodes, 

' For the sealiiigs, see Heuzey, " Rev. d'Assyr./' IV., pp. 3 ff. The points 
of contrast presented by the Cyprus seal may be summarized: (1) The signs 
employed in the inscription are not of Naram-Sin's period, but of the time of 
the First Dynasty. (2) The presence of the Storm-god, the number and 
nature of tlie religious emblems, the arrangement of the design dictated by 
the horror vacui, and the engraving of the seal itself with its undisguised 
employment of the drill, are all Syro-Cappadocian in character ; they are in 
striking contrast to tlie beauty of proportion and restrained design of the 
figures arranged on a plain field by the early Semitic seal-engravers of Akkad. 
(3) The deification of Naram-Sin is of course no proof that he was dead (see 
above, p. 251). But it should be noted that on seals of Naram-Sin's period, 
wliich mention the reigning king or a member of his family, the royal name 
is included in order to indicate a delegation of authority. The text is 
always couched in the second person, in tlie form of an address, and the royal 
name is invariably mentioned first. Had Mar-Islitar, the owner of the seal, 
been a contemporary of Naram-Sin, the inscription on the seal would have 
run : " O Naram-Sin, God of Akkad {or King of Akkad), Mur-Ishtar, tlie 
{here would follow the title of his office), is thy servant." As a matter of fact, 
the inscription runs : " Mar-Ishtar, son of Ilu-bani, servant of tlie god 
Naram Sin." Here Mar-Ishtar's name comes first, then that of his father, and 
lastly that of his patron deity. Naram-Sin is no longer the living God of 
Akkad, but is just an ordinary deity, and occupies an ordinary deity's place 
upon tlie seal. The survival of his name as that of a god in the period of the 
^Vestern Semites is paralleled by the occurrence of the name of Bfir-Sin I., 
King of Ur, as that of a deity in the Moon-god's suite, on a god-list of the 
seventh century n.c. ; see above, p. 2'J9. 

2 For a reproduction of the seal, see Bezold, "^ Zeits. fiir Keilschrift.," 
n., pp. 101 ff. ; cf. also Myres and Ohnefalsch-Richter, "Catalogue of the 
Cyprus Museum,'' pp. 15, 134. 

2 Of the Enkomi cylinder-seals, for example, only two are purely Baby- 
lonian (of the First Dynasty), and the others, with the exception of a few 
rude specimens of native Cypriote workmanship, are Syro-C^appadocian and 
Hittite importations. 


Crete, and even to the mainland of dlrecce itself.' 
There is no -warrant for such imaginin<rs, and the 
archaeologist must be content to follow and not outrun 
his evidence. Babylonian influence would naturally be 
stronger in Cyprus than in Crete, but with neither have 
we evidence of strong or direct contact. There are, how- 
ever, certain features of Aegean culture which may be 
traced to a Babylonian source, though some of the sug- 
gested comparisons are hardly convincing. The houses 
at Fara, for instance, are supplied \\'ith a very elaborate 
system of drainage, and drains and culverts have been 
found in the pre-Sargonic stratum at Nippur, at Surghul, 
and at most early Sumerian sites where excavations have 
been carried out. These have been compared with the 
system of drainage and sanitation at Knossos.^ It is 
true that no other parallel to the Cretan system can 
be cited in antiquity, but, as a matter of fact, the two 
systems are not very like, and in any case it would be 
difficult to trace a path by which so early a connection 
could have taken place. It has indeed been suggested 
that both Babylonia and Crete may have inherited 
elements of some prehistoric culture common to the 
eastern world, and that w^iat looks like an instance of 
mfluence may really be one of common origin.'^ But, 
as in the case of a few parallels between early Egyptian 
and Elamite culture, it is far more probable that such 
isolated points of resemblance are merely due to 

A far more probable suggestion is that the clay 
tablet and stilus reached Crete from Babylonia.* 
Previous to its introduction the Minoan hieroglyphs, 
or pictographs, had been merely engraved on seal- 
stones, but with the adoption of the new material for 
writing they were employed for lists, inventories and 
the like, and these forms became more linear.' The fact 

1 See Winckler, " Die EuphratlSnder und das Mittelmeer," in " Der Alte 
Orient," VII., 2 (1905), p. JO, 

2 See Burrows, "The Discoveries in Crete," p. 9. 
» Op. cit., p. 134. 

* See Sayce, " Archaeology of the Cuneiform Inscriptions," p. 181, 
Burrows, " The Discoveries in Crete/' p. 139, and Hall, " Proc. Soc. Bibl. 
Arch.,'' XXXI., p. 225. 

* For the evolution of Minoan writing, see Evans, "Scripts Minoa," I., 
pp. 19 ff., 28 ff. 


that the cuneiform system of writing was not introduced 
along with the tablet, as happened in Anatolia, is 
sufficient proof that the connection between Babylonia 
and Crete was indirect. It was doubtless by way of 
Anatolia that the clay tablet travelled to Crete,^ for the 
discoveries at Kara-Uyuk prove that, before the age of 
Hammurabi, both tablet and cuneiform writing had 
penetrated westward beyond the Taurus.^ Through its 
introduction into Crete the Babylonian tablet may 
probably be regarded as the direct ancestor of the wax 
tablet and stilus of the Greeks and Romans.^ 

Unlike the clay tablet, the cylinder-seal never 
became a characteristic of the Aegean cultural area, 
where the seal continued to be of the stamp or button- 
form. A cylinder-seal has indeed been found in a 
larnax-burial at Palaikastro, on the east coast of Crete ; 
and it is a true cylinder, perforated from end to end, 
and was intended to be rolled and not stamped upon 
the clay.* The designs upon it are purely Minoan, but 
the arrangement of the figures, which is quite un- 
Egyptian in character, is similar to that of the Meso- 
potamian cylinder.^ In spite of the rarity of the type 

' Tlie claj' disk stamped with hieroglyphic characters, which has been dis- 
covered by Prof. Halbherr at Phaestos, may be cited in support of this view. 
From a scrutiny of the cliaracters upon it, Dr. Evans concludes that the 
original home of its peculiar non-Cretan form of writing is to be souglit in the 
South-West coastlands of Asia Minor, or in an island in close contact with 
the mainland. Tiie disk belongs to a period when the linear form of script 
had succeeded the hieroglypliic in Crete itself (see "Scripta Minoa," I.^ ]>p. 
22 ff., 273 ff.). 

2 It is also tlirough a Hittite medium that we may possibly trace a con- 
nection between the composite monsters of Babylonian and Minoan art ; see 
Sayce, op. cit., p. IHO. It should be noted, however, that, althougli the idea 
underlying tlie designs upon the Zakro sealings may be of foreign origin, the 
development of tbe variant types of many of tlie monster forms was purely 
local and confined to a single period (cf. Hogarth, " Journal of Hellenic 
Studies," Vol. XXII., p. 91). Moreover, tlie bull-monsters, or " Minotaurs," 
of Aegean art were obviously derived from the local cult of Knossos ; in the 
winged and bird-like types Cappadocian influence is more probable. 

^ See Burrows, " Discoveries in Crete," p. 149. 

* In this respect it forms a striking contrast to the clay cylinder from the 
sepulchral deposit of Hagios Onuphrios near Phaestos. The latter is un- 
perforated and the designs are cut at each end of the seal ; it is thus no true 
cylinder, but merely a double-button seal (see Evans, "Cretan Pictographs," 
pp. 10.5, 107). 

^ Tbe figures engraved upon the seal consist of a lion-headed demon and 
t«o female figures, possil)ly with the heads of animals ; they are arranged 
across the field of the cylinder from edge to edge. The seal is of soft, black 


among Cretan seals, this single example from Palaikastro 
is suggestive of IJabylonian influence, througli the 
Syro-Cappadocian channel b}^ wliicli doubtless tlie clay 
tablet reached Crete. 

Anatolia thus formed a subsidiary centre for the 
further spread of Babylonian culture, which had reached 
it by way of Northern Syria before crossing the Taurus. 
The importance of the latter district in this connection 
has been already emphasized by Mr. Hogarth.' Every 
traveller from the coast to the region of the Khabur 
will endorse his description of the vast group of mounds, 
the deserted sites of ancient cities, which mark the 
surface of the country. With one or two exceptions 
these still await the spade of the excavator, and, when 
their lowest strata shall have yielded their secrets, we 
shall know far more of the early stages in the spread of 
Babylonian culture westwards. We have already noted 
the role of Syria as a connecting-link between the 
civilizations of the Euphrates and the Nile,^ and it plays 
an equally important part in linking both of them with 
the centre of early Hittite culture in Asia Minor. It 
was by the coastal regions of Syria that the first Semitic 
immigrants from the south reached the Euphrates, and 
it was to Syria that the stream of Semitic influence, 
now impregnated with Sumerian culture, returned. 
The sea formed a barrier to any further advance in that 
direction, and so the current parted, and passed south- 
wards into the Syro-Palestinian region and northwards 
through the Cilician Gates, whence by Hittite channels 
it penetrated to the western districts of Asia Minor. 
Here, again, the sea w^as a barrier to further progress 
westwards, and the Asiatic coast of the Aegean forms 
the western limit of Asiatic influence. Until the 
passing of the Hittite power, no attempts were made 
by Aegean sea-rovers or immigrants from the main- 
land of Greece to settle on tlie western coast of Asia 
Minor,' and it is not therefore surprising that Aegean 

stone, much worn (see Bosanquet, "Tlie Annual of the British Scliool .it 
Athens," No. VIII., p. 302). 

1 See " Ionia and the East," p. 96 f. , 

2 See above, p. 334 f. ' . 
9 Cf. Hogarth, " Ionia and the East," p. 47 f. 


culture should show such scanty traces of Babylonian 

Of the part which the Sumerians took in originating 
and moulding the civilization of Babylonia, it is un- 
necessary to treat at greater length. Perhaps their 
most important achievement was the invention of 
cuneiform writing, for this in time was adopted as a 
common script throughout the east, and became the 
parent of other systems of the same character. But 
scarcely less important were their legacies in other 
spheres of activity. In the arts of sculpture and seal- 
engraving their o^^^l achievements were notable enough, 
and they inspired the Semitic work of later times. The 
great code of Hammurabi's laws, which is claimed to 
have influenced western codes besides having moulded 
much of tlie Mosaic legislation, is now definitely known 
to be of Sumerian origin, and Urukaginas legislative 
effort was the direct forerunner of Hammurabi's more 
successful appeal to past tradition. The literature of 

Babylon and Assyria is based almost throughout on 
* ... * ~ 

Sumerian originals, and the ancient ritual of the 
Sumerian cults survived in the later temples of both 
countries. Already we see Gudea consulting the 
omens before proceeding to lay the foundations of 
E-ninnu. and the practice of hepatoscopy may probably 
be set back into the period of the earhest Sumerian 
patesis. Sumer, in fact, was the prmcipal source of 
Babylonian civilization, and a study of its culture 
supplies a key to many subsequent developments in 
Western Asia. The inscriptions have already j'ielded a 
fairly complete picture of the politiciil evolution of the 
people, from the \'illage community and city-state to an 
empire which included the effective control of foreign 
provinces. The archaeological record is not so complete, 
but in this direction we may confidently look for further 
light from future excavation and research. 


I. — Recent Explorations in Turkestan in their 
Relation to the Sumerian Problem. 

11. — A Chronological List of the Kings and 
Rulers of Sumer and Akkad. 


Recent Explorations in Turkestan in their Relation to 

the sumerian problem. 

In the second chapter of this volume the opmion was exjjressed 
that, in spite of the unsoundness of certain arguments in favour 
of the theory, the original home of the Sumerians was to be 
sought beyond the mountains to the east of the Babylonian 
plain.^ The arrival of the Sumerians on the banks of the 
Euphrates would thus have been a single episode in a series of 
similar migrations from the east, which, during the historical 
period, are known to have made their appearance in that 
quarter of Western Asia. Until recently it was only possible 
to suggest that such migratory inovements were to be traced to 
racial unrest in more distant regions, and few data were avail- 
able for sui)porting any detailed theory as to the causes of this 
occasional pressure westwards. Important evidence, which has 
both a direct and an indirect bearing on the joroblem, has, how- 
ever, been obtained as a result of recent exx)lorations in Russian 
and Chinese Turkestan. 

The two expeditions conducted by Mr. Raphael Pumpelly, 
on belialf of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, in 19U3 
and 1904, the results of which have now been fully published, 
were occupied mainly with work in the Transcaspian province 
of Russian Turkestan. The physiographical observations 
collected by the first Pumpelly Expedition were supplemented 
during the second of them by archaeological evidence, obtained 
by excavations at Anau near Askhabad, and in the Merv Oasis, 
under the diiection of Dr. Hubert Schmidt, of Berlin, who 
joined the staff of the exjDedition for that purpose. Both 
classes of evidence have a direct bearing upon the problem 
under discussion. 

Of more remote interest, in the present connection, are the 
explorations and excavations carried out by Dr. Stein in 
Chinese Turkestan, on behalf of the Indian Government, during 
his journeys of 1900-1 and 1906-8. Lying in the Tarim basin 
to the east of the Pamirs, the principal scene of his labours is 
far removed from those regions of Western and Central Asia 
from which direct light may be expected upon the Suraerian 
problem. But the Khotan oases and the Taklamakan Desert 

' See above, p. 53 f. 


present in many respects an interesting parallel to the con- 
ditions prevailing in tlie soutLern districts of the Russian pro- 
vince ; and they illustrate, during more recent historical 
periods, a climatio and geological jirocess of which far earlier 
traces have been noted in the latter region. The investigation 
of the archaeological remains, till lately buried in Khotan, has 
also demonstrated the comparatively short period of time 
required for extensive physical changes to have taken place. 
Finally, the physiographical researches of Mr. Ellsworth 
Huntington, who accompanied the first Pumpelly expedition, 
have been extended during 1905-7 into the region of Dr. 
Stein's travels, along the southern and eastern borders of the 
Taklamakan Desert, and have resulted in obtaining corrobora- 
tive evidence of theories already deduced from observations in 
Russian Turkestan. 

It has already been remarked that the "work of the Pumpelly 
Expeditions was of a twofold character. On the one hand, the 
majority of the members devoted themselves to the collection 
of material bearing on the physiography of the Central Asian 
deserts and oases ; and, as a result of their labours, they have 
produced a valuable series of monographs, illustratmg climatic 
and physical changes which have taken place in that region of 
the world. On the other hand, the excavations conducted at 
Anau by Dr. Sclimidt have been followed by a careful present- 
ment of the archaeological material, including a very complete 
ceramic record. The general discussion of the results was 
undertaken by Mr. Raphael Pumpelly, the leader of the 
expeditions, who has given an able and suggestive summary of 
what he conceives to be their general bearing, not only from 
the geological side, but also in their relation to the early 
history of Western Asiatic, and even of North African culture.^ 
At the outset it should be mentioned that, on the archaeological 
side, several of Mr. Pumpelly' s generalizations appear to be 
too far reaching, and he seems to push some of his conclusions 
beyond the limit of his evidence. But this does not detract in 
any "svay from the value of the new data, which he has been 
largely instrumental in acquiring. 

We are not here concerned with details of the earlier geo- 
logical evidence, except in so far as they illustrate or exialain 
the physical changes in the character of the country during 
more recent times. It has long been recognized that the 
deserts of Central Asia owe their existence to a process of 

* Accounts of the first expedition were published under the title 
•* Explorations in Turkestan/' as Publication No. 20 of tlio Carnegie Insti- 
tution of Washington (1905). The various nionograj)hs on the results of the 
second expedition are published in two volumes, entitled "Explorations in 
Turkestan ; Expedition of 1904," as Publication No. 73 (1908) of the same 
institution. Both works were edited by Mr. Raphael Pumpelly, who in 
1906 had already summarized his conclusions in his Presidential Address 
before the Geological Society of America (see "Bulletin of the Geol. Soc. 
of Amer.," Vol. 17, pp. 637 ff.). In a separate volume, entitled "The 
Pulse of Asia," Mr. Huntington lias given an account of his more recent 


♦ ¥j^ f^^ 

1.-TWE. 9.'0'JClJi :EClSlG,^Jf .^ ^ HE CSJBtP OiF TEE PTDLP'ELjLT 

J._"V A.T iC?.".4r. 




desiccation that has taken place since tlie Glacial ej)och,' and 
recent investigations have shown that the contrast to present 
conditions was even more marked than was previously supposed. 
The members of the first Pumiielly Expedition have noted that 
glaciers existed on a greatly extended scale throughout the 
mountains bordering the great basins of Central Asia on the 
south and east, and they have proved the existence of several 
great glacial expansions, each of which naturally reacted on 
the climate of the central region. During the sub-glacial period 
there Avas a general trend towards desolation, and the dried 
silts of seas and rivers were carried by the wind across the 
surface of the ground. The lightest material was carried 
farthest, and, wherever the scanty vegetation could hold it, it 
was deposited in beds of " loess," the extraordinarily fine and 
fertile soil which covers a great part of Northern China and 
Turkestan, and extends in a continuous zone from Xorth of 
the Caspian to Central Europe.'^ The heavier silts in the shai:)e 
of sands moved more slowly imder the pressure of the wmd, 
and they formed great deserts of sand-dunes, heaped in 
places more than a hundred feet high. It is to the shifting or 
formation of such sand-deserts in historic times that we owe 
the burial of the cities in the Khotan region, which have been 
so successfully excavated by Dr. Stein for the Indian Govern- 

1 Cf. Geikie, "The Great Ice Age and its Relatic«i to the Antiquity of 
Man," 3rd ed., pp. G94, 698. In 1894, Prof. James Geikie had noted tlie 
probability that glacial phenomena were more extensively developed in the 
mountains and tablelands of Asia than he felt justified in representing in 
his Glacial Maj) of Asia. In it he incorporated only the results of previous 
observations, at the same time emphasizing its " necessarily unsatisfactory 
character " {op. cit., p. 831, PI. xiii.). This lack of evidence has now in great 
measure been remedied. 

' Loess was formerly regarded as simply a deposit of glacial or fluvial 
origin, but Richthofen's theory that its subsequent distribution was largely 
due to wind-transport (cf. " China," Bd. I., pp. 56 If.) is now generally 
accepted. The fact that it is found heaped up against the sides of mountains 
and contains land, and not water, shells, is unanswerable evidence. For its 
general character and distribution, see Sir Archibald Geikie's "Text-book 
of Geology," 4th ed., I., pp. 439 f. ; II., p. 1351. It may be noted that the 
formation of loess-beds and sand-deserts is a continuous process at the 
present day, under the strong winds which prevail in certain seasons in 
Central Asia ; and even when there is little wind the air is often thick with 
fine dust. The reverse of the process is visible in the effects of wind-erosion, 
very striking instances of which have been described by Dr. Stein ; cp. e.g. 
"Ruins of Khotan," p. 189 f., and "Ancient Khotan," I., p. 107. 

^ It should be noted that the substance ot the dunes around Khotan is to 
be distinguished from the true drifting sand of other Central Asian deserts. 
For Prof, de Loczy has shown by analysis that there is almost complete 
uniformity in composition between the recently formed fertile loess of 
Yotkan (the site of the ancient capital of Khotan) and the moving "sand' 
now surrounding and covering the ancient sites in the desert ; cf. " Ancient 
Khotan," I., pp. 127 f., 199, 242. The thickness of pure loess above the 
culture stratum at Yotkan was no less than from nine to eleven feet, a fact 
which had led earlier European visitors to suppose that some catastrophe, 
such as a great flood, had overwhelmed the old town. It is merely a striking 

2 A 


Although it is clear that since Glacial times there has been 
a general trend towards the i^resent ai-id condition of Central 
Asia, there is reason to believe that, as in the Glacial epoch, 
the subsequent climatic changes have not been uniform. 
Periods of extreme aridity have occurred in which the condition 
of certain regions may have been more desolate than it is to- 
day. But these appear to have alternated with more humid 
periods, when the tracts which were deserted may again have 
been rendered capable of sustaining life. Already in the pre- 
historic period, however, the sea of sand-dunes had encroached 
upon the fertile plains of loess, and it is mainly in the delta- 
oases, formed by streams emerging from the mountains, or at 
points where large rivers lose themselves in the plain, as at 
Merv, that traces of man's handiwork have been discovered. 

Throughout the region of the oases in Southern Turkestan, 
to the north of the Kopet Dagh, the Pumpelly Expedition 
constantly noted the sites of former habitations in regions 
which are now desolate. Not only are there traces of occupa- 
tion where villages exist to-day, but there are also large areas 
which must once have been densely peopled, although they are 
now deserted. The present supply of water in the region could 
support but a small proportion of its former inhabitants, and it 
is necessary to suppose either that there was a greater rainfall, 
or that evaporation was less rapid owing to a lower tempera- 
ture. Similar evidence has been collected with regard to the 
former condition of Chinese Turkestan,^ and it is clear that 
extensive tracts in Central Asia, which are now abandoned to 
the desert, at one time supported a considerable population. 
The evidence points to a change in climatic conditions, which 
lias reacted on the character of the country in such a way as to 
cause racial migrations.' 

In the hope of throwing light on the character of the former 
dwellers in the deserted regions of Russian Turkestan, the 
second Pum])elly Expedition undertook excavations at selected 
sites. At Ghiaur Kala in the Merv Oasis it was ascertained 
that the earliest period of occuijatiou was not older than a few 
centuries B.C., though it is probable that among the great 

example of the manner in which vegetation, under irrigation, catches and 
retains the floating loess-dust. 

' After his recent journey Dr. Stein writes of the Khotan region that it 
appears to him certain that "the water-supply at present available in the 
Yuruiig-kash could under no system whatever be made to suthce for the 
irrigation of the wliole of the large tracts now abandoned to the desert, and 
for this broad fact desiccation akme supplies an ade(|uate explanation" ; see 
the " Geographical Journal," vol. xxxiv. (11)09), p. 17. 

2 For a discussion of the modern theories as to the laws governing 
climatic changes and tlie jiossibility of their cyclical recurrence, see Hunting- 
ton, "The Pulse of Asia," pp. 'MJo ff. It seenjs most probable that the 
changes are of solar origin, the variations being caused by varying forms of 
heat and other energy received from the sun. Such changes would be more 
intensely felt in mid-continental areas, where high niountaius tend to 
intercept moisture from the sea, which is precipitated without hindrance in 
the peripheral or coastal regions. 



number of mounds in the oasis some are of a considerably 
earlier date. Far more imjiortant were the results obttiiucd by- 
excavations in the region below the nortliern sloi)es of the 
Kopet Dagh. It Avas at one of the delta-oases, at Anaii, near 
Askhabad, some three hundred miles east of the Caspian, that 
the I'uiupelly Expedition found traces of prehistoric cultures, 
and obtained its inincipal material for archaeological study. 

Near the midiUe of the Anau oasis, and about a mile ai)art, 
are two hills with rounded contours, rising some forty and iifty 
feet above the plain, and marking the sites of long-forgotten 
cities. The structure of the North Kurgan, or tumidus, had 
already been exposed by a trench cut in it some twenty-five 
years ago by General Komorof, which showed stratified remains, 
including bones of animals and potsherds of plain and painted 
wares. It was this trench that first directed Mr. Pumpelly's 
attention to the mound during his first expedition, and his 
subsequent excavations, both here and in the South Kurgan, 
exposed the same stratified structure. 


Fig. 68. 

Designs on painted potsherds of the Neolithic period (Culture I.) from the 

North Kurgan at Anau. 

[From Pumpelly, Expl. in Turk., I., p. 128, Nos. 67-73.] 

The strata represented successive occupations of the site, 
and, as its inhabitants lived in houses built of sun-dried bricks, 
the hills gradually rose in height. Of the two hills, the North 
Kurgan was of earliest formation, its earlier strata containing 
the remains of a stone-age culture, and its upper cultui-e rei:)re- 
senting an aeneolithic stage of civilization. The third culture, 
that of the lo^vest strata in the South Kurgan, dates from a 
copper age. The archaeological part of the work was directed 
by Dr. Schmidt, and to his admirable method of noting the 
precise spot and level of every object recovered we owe the 
possibility of tracing the gradual development of culture 
during the successive periods of settlement. Moreover, the 
Transcaspian railway passes little more than half a mile to the 
north of the northern mound, or Kurgan. Hence there was no 



diflkulty and little lisk involved in the conveyance to Europe 
of all the archaeological material obtained. The collection of 
animal bt)nes from the Noi-th Kurgan Aveighed nearly half a 
ton. but they were despatched without difliculty to Dr. Duerst 
of Zurich, "who contributed a report ou them to the record of 
the second expedition. 

Tlie cultural progress of the three periods is, however, moat 
clearly revealed by the pottery, which exhibits a gradual 
evolution in form, technique, and decoration. Although the 
vessels of the first two cultures are hand-made, and the wheel 
was not introduced until Culture III., yet the vessels of both 
earlier epochs are excellent ceramic productions. It has already 
been noted that many of the geometric designs occurring on 






Fig. 69. 

Deaigns on painted potsherds of the Aeneolithic period (Culture II.) from the 

North Kurgan at Anau. 

[From Pumpelly, Expl. in Turk., I., p. 133, Nos. 106-113.] 

pottery of the earlier periods from the North Kurgan bear a 
certain resemblance to similar j^ottery found by MM. Gautier 
and Lampre at Mussian, and by M. de Morgan at Susa. This 
may well i)oint to some connection between the stone and early 
metal-using cultures of Transcaspia and Elam ; while the baked 
clay figurines from the copper culture of the South Kurgan 
may be held to prove some early cultural contact witli the 

' See above, pp. 340 ff. For photo^'raphic reproductions of clay figurines 
from the Soutii Kurgan, see the plate facing p. 352. It will be noted that 


Mr. Pumpelly himself would regard the Central Asian oases 
as the fountain-head of Western Asiatic culture. Ac-cording 
to his theory, they were isolated from Europe and Africa from 
the Glacial period onwards, and their cultural rc(|uircnnMits 
were evolved in complete independence. Changes in climatic 
conditions, however, took place, under which the early civiliza- 
tions in these regions tended to disappear, and these gave rise 
to extensive migrations, which reacted in turn on tlie outside 
world. In support of his theory he would trace the early 
appearance of wheat and barley both in Egypt and Babylonia, 
and the presence of certain breeds of domestic animals, to their 
first establishment in the Transcaspian oases. But, in addition 
to differences in their ceramics, the total absence of anj' form 
of writing in the mounds at Anau tells against anj- theoiy 
necessitating a very close racial connection between the 
early inhabitants of the oases and the Sumerians of Baby- 

The evidence, in fact, does not ju.stify us in placing the 
original home of the Sumerians at Anau, nor indeed in any 
particular spot in Central Asia or Iran that has yet been 
examined. But it serves to indicate the region of the world in 
wliich we may expect that future excavations will reveal data 
of a more conclusive character. It may be that the ruined sites 
of Seistan and the Kirman jirovinee will exhibit oloser jjarallels 
with the civilizations of Elam and Sumer. Meanwhile it is 
clear that some contact must have taken place between the 
early peoples of the latter countries and the settlements to the 
north of the Kopet Dagh. We may thus picture the Sumerians 
before their arrival in Babylonia as inhabitants of some district 
to the east of the Euphrates valley, where they evolved the 
elements of their culture, which is already found in a com- 
paratively advanced stage of development on the earliest <»f 
South Babj'lonian sites. 

A further result of the recent explorations in Turkestati i.s 
that an adequate explanation is afforded of the unrest in 
Central Asia, which gave rise to the Sumerian immigration au'l 
to similar racial movements westward. It may now be regarded 
as established that periods of desiccation and extreme aridity 
have led to the abandonment of extensive tracts of country, 
with the result that their former inhabitants have, from time 
to time, been forced to seek sanctuary in more favoured districts. 
While nomad tribes in their search for fresh pasturage might 
drift over the broad steppes to the north and west of Turkestan, 
the agricultural peoples on its southern border would be forced 

the figurines are clearly of the Babylonian type. The resemblance may be 
emphasized by contrast with the terra-cotta figurines of a vt-ry nmch later 
date discovered by Dr. Stein at Yotkan ; see " Kuins of Khotan," p. 2<51. 
Moreover, lapis-lazuli is already found in the second culture of the North 
Kurgan. This points to commercial intercourse with regions still further 
ea8t°on the part of the Anau settlements; but the employment of lapis- 
lazuli by the Sumerians may be cited as further evidence in favour of some 
early cultural connection on their part with Anau. 


t<i turn south of the Caspian. The bleak uplands of the Iranian 
plateau olTer small atti'actioiis for permanent settlement, and 
the routes of the migrant tribes would naturally lead in the 
diroc'tion of Asia Minor and the Mesopotamian plain. Sucli a 
condition of unrest in Central Asia would naturally react on 
peoples at a considerable distance, and this fact explains the 
periodical invasions to which Babylonia has been subjected from 
the east. It may be added that; the immigration of Semitic 
tribes into Syria and Northern Babylonia should possibly be 
traced to physical causes of a like nature. Periods of aridity 
may have occurred in the central portions of the Arabian 
continent, and may have given rise to the Semitic invasions of 
prehistoric and historic times. 

Thus it is possible that the two races, which we find in 
possession of Svimer and Akkad during the earliest historical 
periods, though they arrived from opposite quarters, were 
forced into the region of the Euphrates by causes of a precisely 
similar character. As the Semites, on their way northwards 
from Arabia, colonized the Syrian coast-lands through which 
they i^assed, so the Sumerian race may well have left per- 
manent traces of its presence in the valleys and more fertile 
oases of Iran. There are already indications that work on 
Sj^'ian and ^V'est Mesopotamian sites will throw a flood of light 
upon the problems of early Semitic history, and it may perhaps 
fall to the lot of a fortunate excavator, in some region east of 
the Euphrates valley, to recover the cult-images of primitive 
Sumerian gods, and to bring to light examples of the picture- 
Avriting from which the early cuneiform characters were 

IB na-^i 



























^ ^ = 
= 2 a 

£ rt'bb 

s i 5 5 .1 1; J 

C C C C 8 3 (-< 



















.22 a. 

o o 



, ^ CO 

21 I 

2 rt g 











o o o 

»0 O "O 

1- i^ tc 

(M Ol CI 























& -a 
•r * 











■ c 
ts rt 

-J= E 

en V 

rt t- 


^ ht rt r ii 

^ I ^- rt -S -« ^ 

u rt t. >>■..>, -H f—i 









a, S 


■^ & 

C 01 



§-. J 


















t; t: 3 

-£ ■= ^ 


en 0; 


■^ c S 

— . aj - — 

J; - -; 

o - 
X -^ fl 

a-- H 
en M 

X O « 

ii '-^ ® 
rt 'a. .£ 

C 0) a; 
•- j= ^ 

«*" o 
E •- 

t- t 3 

n E EJi 

««-2 E = 
HI c "" « 

c; '^ c — 

rt E *^ t/j 
ni ^^ . • »- 

g U3 I— I O 

E 4; . =" 

5 :> -T- i4_ 

£ 5 

rt .- C 

2 =^ 

= O C 3 

•- > rt a 

-^ o . 

II '^■^.■5 

. o •" 
rt "^ - 

.» - C i.- 

_ 2 •*^ * 

' I# **■ Qj 

« > ^^ 

rt £ i sr 

II ^ -^ ^- 
»- r. .- 

I ?-=« 

• Oj I- •— • 

H C t 
C rt j= (D 

>'.=- = 

^- .E ^'^ "3 

■< ^— • o 
-! : S 
t. • ® ,o 

W«J.rt J 

•5 ="5 






»— I 






























































(MOr-lOi-IOO'-llOt>. Hct-"* JC lO "* "H CO 

O" SS^ti*^ (M rH (M (M 


rt -ri 


2 c 
c -2 i .2 

5 ^ ^ J2 

^ O S .iS J P M ^ D ic W N 


K i 





















A A, gifts to, 223 

Abba-dugga, 313 

Abi-isliar, seal of, 246 

Abu Habba, site of Sippar, 8 f. ; 
excavations atj 37, 223 ; objects 
and inscriptions from, 204, 20G, 
212, 218, 223, 235, 250, 309 f. 

Abu Hatab, site of Kisurra, 9 ; ex- 
cavations at, 28 flf. ; plan of, 29 ; 
inscribed brick from, 284 ; con- 
tracted burials at, 331 

Abu Khuwasij, 31 

Abil Shahrain, site of Eridu, 35 ; ex- 
cavations at, 35 f. ; plan of, 3G 

Abvdos, 323 f. , 332 ; recent diggings 
at, 324, 326 f., 332 

Abyssinia, 334 

Abzu-banda, 111, 189 f. 

Abzu-ega, 190 

Accounts, tablets of, 169, 177, 284, 

Achaemenian kings, 337 

Adab, site of, 9, 97, 163; excava- 
tions at, 30 ; in relation to 
Euphrates, 11 ; its commercial 
relations with Lagash, 238 ; de- 
strnction of, 31 f . ; nte also Bia- 

Adamdun, situation of, 290 ; patesis 
of, 292 

Adda-Pakshu, sukkal of Elam, 306 f.; 
taljlets from period of, 336 

Addatur, 113 

Adhem, 7, 287 

Aegean, sites, 81 ; Asiatic coast of, 
347 ; sea-rovers of, 347 

Aegean culture, stages of, 1 ; its 
early connection with Egypt, 341 ; 
traces of Babylonian influence in, 
322, 345 ff. ; wild comparisons be- 
tween Aegean and Babylonian art, 
344 f. 

Aenragin, 171 

'Afej marshes, 85 f. 

Agade, older name of Akkad, 14 ; 
site of, 37 ; Sargon of, 216 ff. ; sec 

Agathias, 312 

Agia Paraskevi, 344 

Aha, mastaba-tomb of, 323 

'AkarkQf, 38 

Akiiush, 189 f. 

Akkad, city, site of, 37 ; early centre 
of Semitic settlement, 53 ; in re- 
lation to Kish, 210 f., 214 f., 228, 
231 f., 249 ; in relation to Elam, 
226 ; " sons," or citizens, of, 208, 
211 ; siege of, 240 ; Dynasty of, 
216 ff., 252 ff., 350 f. ; in relation 
to the Dynasty of Ur, 253; kings 
of Sumer and, 362 

Akkad, land, limits of, 6 f., 12 f. ; 
name of, 13 ff., 17 ; iniiabitants of, 
40 ff. ; Semitic immigration into, 
20:i ; system of land ttnuro in, 95 ; 
intluence of art of, 66 ; early re- 
lations with YAixm, 214, 244; 
cultural connections with Elam, 
335 ff. 

Akkadian, the Semitic speech of 
Babylonia, 52 f. 

Akkadians, the Semitic inhabitauta 
of Northern Babylonia, 4 ; former 
use of the term, 4 

Akkada, 14 

Akki, 232 

Akurgal, patesi of Lagash. 117 f. ; 
sculptured figures of, 112 ll". ; in 
chronological table, 360 

Al[. . . ], king of Kisli, 141; in 
chronological table, 360 

Al-Batiha, 8 

Al-Gimii-Sin, "the City of Gimil- 
8in," 301 

Aliakhu, 208 

Alia, patesi of Lagash, 296 ; in chro- 
nological table, 362 

Alia, resident in Lagash, 237 

Alloys, evidence as to use of, 73 f. 

Alluvium, limit of Babylonian, 7 

Alu-usharshid, a former reailing of 
the name Urumush or Kimush, 

Amageshtin, temple of, 190 

Amal, temple of, 226, 232 

Amananu, governor of Sippar, 3lG 




Ajnanus, 261 

Amat-Bau, 171 

Amattar-sirsirra, 184 

Ambar Su, 244 

Aiuiaud, Arthur, 18, 20, 109 

Ammi-zaduga, 307 

Aniorite invasion, disproved in reign 
of Libit-Ishtar, 284 

Amurru (Martu), a West Semitic 
god, 344 

Amurru, the Western Semites, 55 ; 
origin of, 65 

Amurru, the Western Land, 2G1, 
MtK), 321 ; Sargon's conquest of, 
22r>, 233 f. ; its king deported, 
244 ; slaves from, 238 ; relation of 
kings of Isin to, 311, 315 f. ; 
Babylonian influence in and be- 
yond, 322 

Ana, 194, 19G, 198 ; see also Anu 

Anatolia, 346 f. 

Anau, excavations at, 2, 351, 355 f. ; 
potsherds from, 341, 355 f. ; terra- 
cotta figurines from, 342, 356 ; 
wheat and barley found in earliest 
stratum at, 332, 357 

Andrae, W., 11, 22 ff., 28 f.,78, 330 

Anikurra, 112 

Animal cults, Egyptian, 334 

Animal forms, Suraerian treatment 
of, 80 

Animal motives, on Elamite painted 
pottery, 341 f. ; on proto-Elaraite 
seal-impressions, 342 

Anita, 112 ff., 116 

Anshan, its conquest by Manishtusu, 
224, 231, 244; its conquest by 
Gudea, 279, 289 ; alliance of Dun- 
gi's daughter with the patesi of, 
287 ; its conquest by Bungi, 288 ; 
officials for, 290 ; a patesi of, 292 ; 
captivity of Ibi-Sin in, 304 ; its 
success against Ur, 308 ; its defeat 
by Anu-mutabil, 308 

Antasurra, 146, 189 f. 

Antimony, 73 f. 

Ann, 48, 104, 275 ; see also Ana 

Anu-banini, king of Lulubu, 250 

Anu-mutabil, governor of Uer, 308 

Anunitu, 226, 232, 268 

Anunpad, 113 

Anzanite inscriptions, 206, 212 

Apirak, 241, 243 

Apil-Sin, contracts of reign of, 316 

Arabesque pattern, on Sumerian 
sealing. 176 

Arabia, 242, 251, 258, 261, 323, 358 

Aral)ian desert, 6 

Arad-Nannar, patesi of Lagash, 301 f.; 
in chronological table, 362 

Archers, in the army of Ur, 286 

Architect, Gudea as, 260 f., 269 

Archive-chambers, at Tello, 293 

Ark, of bulrushes, 232 

Armanu, 242 

Art, comparison of early Sumerian 
and Akkadian, 228 f. ; of Kish and 
Akkad, 230 

Arua, 149 ff. 

Asar, Osiris, 325 

Asari, Sumerian god, 325 

Ashnunnak, or Tupliash, 306 ; under 
Manishtusu, 212 ; patesis of, 306 

Ashukhu-wood, 261 

Ashur, 287 

Ashur-hani-pal, 12, 204 f. ; tablets 
from Library of, 4, 59, 217, 299, 
303 f. 

Asia Minor, 342, 347, 358 ; Central, 
54, 351 ff. 

Askhabad, 351, 355 

Asphalt, 261 ; set also Bitumen 

Asses, for chariots, 162 ; House of 
the, 259 

Assyria, 7 

Assyrian kings, their policy of de- 
portation, 240 

Assyrians, sculpture of, 68 ff. ; omen- 
literature of, 206 

Astrological texts, 217 

Asukhur Canal, 109, 149 f. 

Axe, Sumerian form of, 137 

Az, 150 f., 290 

Azupiranu, 232 

Bab el-Mani)EB, Straits of, 323 

Babbar, 84, 124, 127, 129, 148, 194, 

Babishue, 301 

Babylon, 13, 38, 309 ; excavations 
at, 37 ; pot-burials and early re- 
mains at, 30, 37 ; Sargon's build- 
ings at, 226, 236 ; Dungi's sack of, 
281 ff., 285; in relation to the 
Dynasty of Isin, 63 f., 313 ff. ; 
rise of, 319 ; in relation to the 
Dynasty of the Sea-country, 62 f. ; 
her struggle with Larsa, 318 f. ; 
her position in later history, 319 f. 

Babylonia, in the Neolithic period, 2 ; 
relics of prehistoric culture in, 342 ; 
her early cultural influence, 321 ff. ; 
in relation to Egypt, 322 ff., 334 f. ; 
in relation to Elam, 335 ff. ; in the 
West, 322, 343 ff. 

Babylonian Chronicle, 62 

Babylonian Monarchy, fotmdation 
of, 63 f., 313 ff. 

Bad-mada, 296 



Badu, kiiig^ of Lagnsh, 105 ; in chro- 
nological table, 300 
Baga, 189 f. 
Baghdad, 38 f., 218 
Bahr Nejef, 10 
Banar, 114 
Banks, E. J., 07 
Barakhsu, 205, 308 
Baraz-sirini, Field of, 206 
Barges, for grain, 262 
Barkiba, 160 
Bailey, 357 ; in earliest stratum at 

Anau, 332 
Barnamtarra, wife of Lugal-anda, 

170 f., 173 
Barsagannudu, 113 f. 
Barshib, 261 
Basalla, 261 
Basar, 225 
Basha-mania, patesi of Lagash, 254 ; 

in chronological tjible, 361 
Basha-Shushinak, patesi of Susa, 

214, 289 ; period of, 305 ; proto- 

Elaniite inscriptions of, 338 
Basime, 209 
Bas-reliefs, Sumerian, 66 ff., 110 ff., 

129 ff. ; early Semitic, 220 f., 

228 f., 242 f., 247 ff. ; Assyrian, 

68 ff., 82 
Battle-axe, Sumerian use of the, 286 ; 

of Naram-Sin, 243 
Battle-mace, 131, 156 
Battle- scenes, 135 ff., 220, 230, 247 ff. 
Ban, 108, 181, 185 f., 271, 275. 296 ; 

temples of, 259, 264, 267, 26!>, 273, 

298 ; bowls dedicated to, 107 ff. ; 

representation of, 135 
Bau-ninara, official of Ur-^Ningirsu, 

275 f. 
Bavian, 63 
Baz, Field of, 206 
Bazuzu, father of Utug, 103 
Bead-making, Egyptian art of, 328 
Bedouin custom, 40 
Bel, name of, 52 ; the god Marduk, 

Belaku, patesi of Ashnunnak, 306 
Beleous, 312 
Beletaras, 312 

Beli-arik, patesi of Susa, 291, 305 
Berber dialects, 323 
Berossu.s, 53, 59 ; l^ynasties of, 63 
Berthelot, M. P. E., 73 
Bezold, Prof. C, 344 
Bi-Gani-sharri, 246 
Bil&dhuri, 8 

Bilingual compositions, 4 
Bin-Gani-sharri, son of Naram-Sin, 

Bint el-Mderre, 31 

Birs, site of Bursipj)?*, 10 
Biema^'a, site of Adab, 9 ; excava- 
tions at, 30, 97 ; character uf 

buildings uncovered at, 89 
Bitumen, 76, 212, 262 
"Black-headed ones," 40 
Blau monuments, 65 
Boat-inspectors, 181 
Boats, for transport, 235, 261 
Body-paint, 27, 330 
Boeotia, Neolithic potsherds from, 

Buissier, A., 205, 304, 309 
Borsippa, 10, 13 ; excavations at, 37 
Bosanqiiet, Prof. R. C, 346 
Boundary-ditch, between Lagash and 

Umma, 126 ; of Ur-Engur, 282 ; 

see aho Frontier 
Boimdary-stones, 143 
Bow, introduced by the Semites, 

247 f., 286; of Naram-Sin, 243; 

adopted by Dungi, 287 
Breasted, Prof. J. H., 334 
Breccia, 270 f. 
Bricks, of Sumer, 13 ; character of 

Babylonian, 91 ; plano-convex, 26, 

35, 91, 94, 332 ; change in size 

of, 263 f. ; maiiufacture of, 267 ; 

stamped with figure of Imgig, 98 ; 

origin of the Egyptian brick, 323, 

Brick-stamps, 75, 219 
Bronze, evidence with regard U>, 

72 ff. ; later Elaniite work in, 337 
Budge. Dr. E. A. Wa!lis,37, 160, .329 
I'ull-monsters, jiroto-Klamile, 242 
]5ulls, as offerings, 129, 140; copper 

figures of, 256 ; lunnau-hcaded, 

77, 330 
Bur-Sin I., king of Ur. roign nf, 

296 ff.; expeditions of, 29!t ; build- 
ings of, 298 ; in relation to Enlil, 

297 ; statue of, 298 ; his deification 
and cult, 296 ; his survival as a 

I deity in the Moon-go<l's suite, 
299, 344; in chronologiail table, 

Biir-Sin II., king of I.|<in, 312: in 
chronological table, 362 

Burial, of the dead, 21 ; different 
f.irms of, 26 f., 30 ; after battle, 
138 f., 149, 331; Egyptian and 
Babylonian fasliions of, 325 f., 
331 f. ; earliest Susian form of, 
331 f. 

Burial fees, 181 f. 

Burial-mounds, after battle, 125, 
162, 331 

Burrows, Prof. E. M., 34b 

Buwariya, 33 



Canals, 3, 107, 153 ff. , 185 
Canopic branch, of the Nile, 324 
Cappadocia, 339 ; prehistoric pottery 

from, 341 
Caravan-routes, from the Iranian 

plateau, 335 
Carnegie Institution, of Washington, 

351 f. 

Caspian, 353, 355, 358 

Casting, in metal, 72 ff. 

Cattle, transport of, 235, 237 

Cedar, remains of pillars of, 93 ; 
from Mt. Amanus, 261 

Cedar-groves, sacred, 267 

Cemeteries, in l^pper Egypt, 326 

Central Arabia, 358 

Central Asia, 54, 351 ff. 

Cesnola, General di, 343 

Chamberlain, royal, 115 

Chariots, of war, 162 ; representation 
of a, 134 

Chialy Effendi, 245 

China, 353 

Chinese, 54 

Chinese Turkestan, 351, 354 

Chronicle, the Babylonian, 62 ; of 
Sargon and Naram-Sin, 220, 225, 
233 ff., 240 f. ; concerning early 
Babylonian kings, 282, 312 ; 
Dynastic, from Nippur, 59, 63, 
279 f., 303, 308 f., 311 f., 315 

Chronicles, Hebrew Books of, 240 

Chronological table, of kings and 
rulers of Sumer and Akkad, 360 ff. 

Chronology, classes of data for de- 
termining, 57 ff. ; Babylonian, 
62 ff. ; of the later Sumerian 
period, 315 

Chicago, Exploration Fund of the 
University of, 30 

Chieftains, meeting of, 45 f. 

Chipiez, Charles, 66 

Cilician Gates, 347 

Citadel Tell, at Susa, 339 

Cities, in Babylonia, 16 ff. ; origin 
of. 84 f. ; communication between, 

City-gods, origin and development 
of, 84 f. ; deBcrij)tion of a, 268 ; 
position of, 101 f. ; in relation to 
the patesi, 181 ; disputes between, 
101, 121 f. 

City-states, development of, 84 f., 
321 ; wars of the, 120 ff. ; weak- 
ening and decay of the, 239 f., 252 

Clay, Prof. A. T., 9, 52, 228 

Clay taVjlet, borrowed by Elam, 
338 f. ; introduced into Cappa- 
docia, 339 ; reached Crete, 345 

Climatic changes, a cause of racial 
migrations, 354, 357 f. 

Clothing, Sumerian and Semitic, 41 f. 

Code, of Hammurabi, 184 ; Sume- 
rian origin of, 184, 348 ; of Gudea, 
272 ; see also Laws 

Codes, legal, 347 

Colour-dishes, for face or body- 
paint, 27, 330 

Commercial intercourse, in Baby- 
lonia, 237 f.t; with foreign coun- 
tries, 238, 321 f. 

Conch-shells, cylinders and plaques 
from, 78 

Cones, votive, 258 ; of copper, 256 ; 
coloured, 34 ; historical, 164 f., 
178 ff. 

Confiscation, Sumerian laws against, 

Constantinople, 218 

Contract tablets, 64 

Contracted burial, Sumerian practice 
of, 331 

Convoys, early service of, 237, 244 

Copper, Babylonian evidence with 
regard to, 72 ff. ; objects from 
Fara, 3, 26 f. ; from Kimash, 261 ; 
lance of, 229 ; known to pre- 
dynastic Egyptians, 326 ; its dis- 
placement of flint in Egypt, 327 ; 
effect of Egyptian skill in working, 

Copper-mines, in Elam, 261 

Corn, tribute of, 164 ; fees of, 181 f. ; 
see also Grain 

Corvee, 182 

Couriers, 291 

Court, expenses of the, 169 

Crenelated buildings, Egyptian and 
Sumerian, 332 

Crenelation, in walls of early Egyp- 
tian buildings, 323 

Crete, traces of Babylonian culture 
in, 345 f. ; parallels between cul- 
tures of Elam and, 341 

Cros, Commandant Gaston, 17, 172, 
189, 269 

Cruciform monument, from Sippar, 

Cult-centres, 84, 321 

Cult-images, 50, 358 

Cults, survival of Sumerian, 347 

Cuneiform writing, invention of, 65, 
348 ; the Sumerian form the parent 
of otiier systems, 348 

Cui)bearers, 112 f., 236 

Ciu], Prof. Edouard, 184 

Curium, 343 

Cutha, 8 f., 13, 37 f., 283, 293; 
centre of Nergal's cult, 38 



Cylinders, of Gudea, 266 f. 

Cjlinder-soal, early migrHtiuiis of 
the, 333 f. ; introduced into Baby- 
lonia by Siunerians, 333 ; possible 
Egyptian evolution of the, 333 f. ; 
earliest form of, 334 

Oylindtr-seals, encjaving of, 78 ; 
composite njonsters on, 77 ; official 
use of, 230 f. ; Sumerian, 3, 27, 
48, 174 ff., 284 ; early Semitic or 
Akkadian, 176, 229, 344 ; Egyp- 
tian, 322, 334 f . : Cyi)riote, 343 f. ; 
Cyro-Cappadocian and Hittite, 
344 ; Cretan, 346 

Cyprus, prehistoric pottery of, 341 ; 
its alleged conquest by Sargon of 
Agade, 234, 343 ; inadequate evi- 
dence for the theory, 343 f. ; ex- 
tent of Babylonian influence in, 
234, 343 ff. 

Dada, patesi of Shuruppak, 283 

Dada, magician, 237 

Dagan, 284 

Daggers, Sumerian, 79 ; engraved 

panels from handles of, 81 f. 
Danigalnunna, temple of, 294 
Damik-ilishu, king of Isin, 309, 

316 S., 319 ; in chronological table, 

Date-formulae, 225, 257 f., 285, 295 
Date-lists, 58 
Dates, trade in, 237 
Dati-Enlil, father of Shar-Gani- 

sharri, 227, 232 
Dating, methods of, 57 f., 168, 170, 

219, 318 
De Clercq Collection, 158, 218, 308 
De la Fuye, Col. Allotte, 168 ff., 

170, 173 ff. 
De Lancy, Barre, 218 
De Morgan, J., 39, 66, 206, 212, 324, 

330, 332, 335, 337, 339 ff., 356 
De Sarzec, E., 17 ff., 77 f., 90, 92 f., 

96, 130, 169, 258, 261, 266, 270, 332 
Dead, treatment of the, 21. 26 f., 125, 

138 ff., 149, 162, 331 ; Egyptian 

worship of the, 334 
Decadence, in Sumerian art. 82 
Deification, of early Babylonian 

kings, 203, 222, 251, 273 f., 288, 

298 f., 310 ; effect of, 300 ff. ; 

origin of, 273 f., 335 
Deir, 37 
Deke, 31 

Delitzsch, Prof. Friedrich, 5, 12, 317 
Delta, Egyptian, 2, 324, 334 
Demonology, 76 
Deportation, policy of, 239 f. 
Der, 226, 285, 308 

Dhorme, Pere Paul, 228 

Diarbekr, 244 f. 

Dilbat, 319 

Dilmun, 2.35, 262, 291 

Diorite, 71 ; from M.i-^'an, 242, 2."i8, 
262, 209 f. 

Disk, from Phacstos, .346 

Divination, by oil, 183 

Diviners,, IM 

Divorce, fees for, 183 f. ; abuse of, 

Diwaniya, 85 

Diyala, 287 

Door-sockets, 219 

Dorians, 50 

Doves, as offerings, 128 f. 

Dragons, in Sumerian art, 77 

Drainage, systems of, 345 

Dreams, of Eannatum, 124 ; of Gu- 
dea, 266 

Dress, 41 ff., Ill f. 

Drill, in engraving, 78, 344 

Droop, J. P., 341 

Duba'i, 31 

Dudu, official at Ur-Nina's court, 113 

Dudu, chief priest of Ningirsu under 
P^ntemena, 166 ff. ; perforated 
block of, 100, 110, 106 

Duerst, Dr. J. Ulrieh, 3.56 

Dugru, of Ningirsu, 190 

Dumuzi-abzu, 190 

Dun- . . ., patron deity of Ur-Nina'a 
dynasty, 109, 177 

Dungi, king of Ur, policy of, 282 ; 
empire of, 253, 285 f. ; his adop- 
tion of the bow, 286 f. ; Elamito 
campaigns of, 287 ; provincial ad- 
ministration of, 288 ff. ; buildings 
of, 293 f, ; copper cone of, 250 ; 
deification of, 274, 288 ; cult of, 
274, 298 f. ; in chronological table, 

Dungi-Babbar, 295 

Dunpae, 299 

Dunshagga, 109, 181, 267 ; temples 

to. 185, 264 
Dur-ilu, former reading of the name 

of Der, 220 
Dur-Sharrnk!n, 217 
Diir-Sin, 206 
Dynastic Chronicle, from Nippur, 

59, 63, 279 f., 303, .308 f., 311 f., 

Dynastic Egyptians, 323 
Dynastic lists, 59 
Dynasties, Babylonian, 62 f. 

E-ABZU, king of Umma, 97 

E-anna, in Erech, 12, 33, 196, 280 



293 ; in Lagash, 121, 161, 190, 264, 
269, 273 

K-babbar, in Sippar, 218, 268 ; in 
Laraa, 186 ; in Lugash, 180, 189 

E-ditar-kalania, 319 

E-engnr, 190 

K-khalbi. 294 

E-kharsa^, 294 

E-kur, 32, 86, 88, 193, 198, 201, 235, 
281, 297 

E-nieslam, 293 

E-meteursagga, 39 

E-ninnu, 77, 107 f., KJO, 168, 185, 
261, 265 ff., 269, 272, 274, 276, 
296 ; earliest mention of, 95 ; re- 
mains of, 19, 259 

E-pa, 108, 264 

E-patutila, 319 

E-sagila, 282 

E-salgilsa, 296 

E-silsirsir, 273 

E-ulmash, 217 

Ea, 246, 289 ; see Enki 

Ea-[ . . .], king |of Isin, 313; in 
chronological table, 362 

Ea-bani, figures identified with, 77, 
174 f. 

Eagle, as emblem, 133 ; lion-headed, 
81 f. 

Eannatum, patesi of Lagash^ 42 f., 
68, 104, 192, 229 f. ; reign of, 
120 S. ; conquests of, 144 ff. ; 
character of, 152, 155 f. ; titles of, 
152 ; buildings and canals of, 
152 ff. ; well of, 93, 155 ; repre- 
sentations of, 1.36 ff., 140 f. ; in 
chronological table, 360 

Ebarti, Elamite dynasty of, 306, 308 

Eclipse, 62 

Edfu, 324 ; legend of, 324 

Egypt, Palaeolithic and Neolithic 
remains in, 2 ; recent excavations 
on early sites in, 324 ff. ; early cul- 
tural connections with Babylonia, 
78, 322 ff., 332 f., 328, 334 f., 346 ; 
suggested relations with Elam, 
340 f., 345; early influence in 
Syria, 334 f., 346 ; connection with 
Hittite culture, 346 ; with the 
Aegean, 341 ; hypothetical Se- 
mitic invasion of Upper, 323 flf., 
' 328 ; granaries of, 92 

Egyptian culture, 326 ff. ; legends, 
323 f. ; language, 323 ; religion, 
Semitic element in, 334 ; writing, 
origin of, 329 f. 

Egyptians, Neolithic and predy- 
nastic, 1, 323, 332 ; early dynastic, 
323, 332 

Ekikala, 189 

El-Hibba, excavations at, 20 f. ; in- 
scriptions from, 157 ff. 

El-Katr, 8 

El-Ohamir, site of Kish, 8 f., 38 f. 

Elam, prehistoric peoples of, 342; 
preliistoric potteiy of, 340 ff. ; 
early cultural relations with Baby- 
lonia, 321, 335 ff. ; suggested cul- 
tural parallels with Egypt, 340 f., 
345 ; with Crete, 341 ; frontier of, 
6 f. ; defeated by Eannatum, 145, 
148 ff. , 160 ; defeated by Lu-enna, 
172 ; relations of Manishtusu with, 
212 ff. , 231; conquered by Uru- 
mush, 205, 231 ; relations of Sar- 
gon and Naram-Sin with, 225 f., 
231 f., 243 f. ; commercial inter- 
course with, 238, 289 ; early Se- 
mitic immigration into, 250, 289, 
336 ; Gudea's cam[)aign in, 258 ; 
Dungi's conquest and adminis- 
tration of, 207 ff., 292 ; under the 
later kings of Ur, 299 f., 304 ; de- 
feated by Anu-mutabil, 308 ; Ela- 
mite invasions, 304 f., 308, 311 ; 
copper mines in, 261 ; craftsmen 
from, 261 f. ; patesis of, 231, 243, 
305 ; governors of, 306 ; sukkals 
of, 306 ; sculpture and metal-work 
of, 337 

Elamite titles, 306 ff. 

Elamites, 54 

Embalming, of the dead, 332 

Emblems, sacred, 267 ; of Ningirsu, 
98 ; of a goddess, 133 ; of Lagash, 
98, 100, 131, 134, 167 ; of a city, 
150 ; Elamite origin of certain 
Babylonian, 342 

Enakalli, patesi of Umma, 126 ; suc- 
cessor of, 158 f. ; in chronological 
table, 360 

Enannatum I., patesi of Lagash, 
157 ff. ; titles of, 160 ; in chrono- 
logical table, 360 

Enannatum II., patesi of Lagash, 
168 ff ; raid of Elamites in reign 
of, 172 ; in chronological table, 

Enannatum, chief priest of the Moon 
god at Ur, 310 f. 

Enbi-Ishtar, king of Kish, 202 f. ; 
racial character of, 53 ; in chrono- 
logical table, 360 

Enbu-ilum, 203 

Enetarzi, patesi of Lagash, 169 ff. ; 
letter to, 172 ; in chronological 
table, 360 

Engilsa, patesi of Lagash, 176, 209 f. ; 
in chronological trtble, .'560 

Engraving, of stone, shell, etc., 



78 ff., 347 ; of metal, 78, 1G7, 
Eniggal, royal steward, 170 ; seal- 

ings of, 173 
Enkhegal, king of Lagasli, 106 ; in 

chronological table, .'^60 
Enki, 48, 84 f.. 107, 1'2S f., 148, 107, 
194, 246, 275, 301 ; his temple in 
Eridu, 35 f., 108, 293, 298 ; his 
temple in Girsii, 250 
Enkigal, 158 
Enkomi, 344 

Enlil, 85, 101, 103 f., 128, 165 L, 
193 f., 196, 198 f., 201, 289, 294, 
297 ; his temple at Nippur, 87 f., 
219, 244, 281 ; his temple in La- 
gash, 185, 189 ; frontier shrine to, 
127 ; canal dedicated to, 107 ; 
name of, 52 
Enlil-bani, king of Isin, 312 ; in 

chronological table, 362 
Enlitarzi, patesi of Lagash, 168 ff. ; 

in chronological table, 360 
Enlulim, 268 
Enshagkushanna, lord of Sumer, 201 ; 

in chronological table, 3()0 
Ensignnn, 259, 268 
Entemena, patesi of Lagash, 52, 90, 
125 ; reign of, 161 ff. ; silver vase 
of, 78, 167 f. ; cone of, lOO ff., 
117, 122, 126 f., 143, 154, 157 ff., 
164 f. ; in chronological table, 360 
Enzu, 84, 128 f., 148, 194 
Eponym Lists, 62 

Ercch, 9 f., 12 f., 84. 104, 147, 152, 
163, 186, 194 f., 198 ff., 214, 238, 1 
240, 279 f., 293, 298, 304, 310 f., ' 
313, 317 f. ; excavations at, 32 ff. ; 
.see also Warka 
Eridu, 6, 13,84 f., 148, 152, 167, 197, | 
282. 293, 298, 310 f. ; excavations 
at, 35 f. ; see aho Abfl Shahrain 
Erinda, 246 
Erythraean Sea, 53 
Esar, king of Adab, 97 f. 
Estates, purchase of, 206 ff. 
Euphrates, names of, 9 ; changes in 
course of, 7 ff. ; contrasted with 
Tigris, 11 f. ; period of liigh water 
in, 11 f. ; at >."ippnr, 88 f. 
Evans, Dr. Arthur, 345 f. 
E.xcavatious, in Sumer and Akkad, 
16 ff. ; in Egypt, 324 ff. ; in 
Persia, 335, 339 f. ; in Turkestan, 
351 f., 355 f. 
Eyes, of statues, 76, 212 f. 

Face-paint, 330 

Faluja, 10, 38 

Fara, site of Shuruppak, 9, 28, 84 ; 

excavations at, 24 ff. ; plan f.f, 
25 ; discoveries at, 3, 65, 89, 331, 
345 ; objects from, 73, 78, 28; J, 

Fees, priestly, 181 f. ; of diviner.^, 
183 ; of the grand vizir and pa- 
tesi, 183 ; for divorce, 183 

Fetish emblems, 329 

Figurines, of terra-cotta, 342, 356 ; 
in precious metals, 337 

Fire-necropoles, so-called, 21 

Fish, as offerings, 129 

Fisher, C. S., 8, 86 ff. 

Fishery inspectors, 181 

Fish-men, 53 

Fish-ponds, 182 ; sacred, 268 

Flint-knapping. 327 

Flints, Egyptian, 2, .326 f. 

Flute-player, to Ningirsn, 268 

Forced labour, 164, 182 ; see aho 

Fossey, Prof. Charles, 6, 17 

Foucart, G., 329 

Foundation-figures, 72 ff. 

Foundation-offerings, 337 

Fresnel, F., 218 

Frontier-ditches, 126 ff., I.")3 {., 159, 
162. 164 f. 

Frontier-shrines, 127 f., 159 

Funeral rites, 140 f. 

GALALnf, 185, 264, 267 
Galu-andnl, patesi of Lagash, 206 ; 

in clironological table, 3(»2 
Galu-BaV)bar, pate.ti of Umma, 23, 

258 ; in chronological table, 361 
Galw-Iiau, patesi of Lagash, 255, 

257 ; in chronolo;;icHl table, 361 
Galu-Gula, patesi of Lagash, 255, 

257 ; in chronological table, lUM 
Galu-kazal, p.itesi of Lagash, 296 ; 

in chronological fal'le. ,'562 
Gankhar, 287, 301 f., 308 
Garments, Sumerian and Semitic, 

41 ff. 111 f. ; as fees, 181 ; trade 

in, 237 
Garstang, Prof. .J., .341 
Gatumdug, 108, 152, 168, 100, 264, 

266, 269, 271 
Gautier, .L-E., 220, .•i36,_.340, 356 
G«ikic, Sir Archibald, .353 
Geikie, Prof. James, 353 
Genouillac, H. de, 112, 116, 162, 

169 ff, 173, 176. 179, 184, 190, 

193, 273 
Geometric designs, on potter}', 341 
Geshtin-anna, 259 
Ghiaur Kala, 354 
Gifts, accompanving the sale of land, 

95, 207 

2 a 



Gigiinrt, 274 

Ciikana, of Ninniakh, 189 

Gilding, of carved stone objects, 270 

Gilgamesh, figures identified with, 

75 K, 174 f. ; epic of, 9 
Gimdunpae, wife of Gudea, 272 
Gimii-ihshu, king of Isin, 309 f . ; 

in chronological table, 362 
Gimil-Sin, king of Ur, 284 ; reign 

of, 297 ff. ; cult of, 298, 301 ; in 

chronological table, 362 
Ginarbaniru, 190 
Girnun, 268 
Girsu, a division of Lagash, 108, 

152, 163, 190, 193 ; temples in, 

259, 264, 296, 301 ; House of, 91, 

108 ; waU of, 186 ; canal of, 185 
Gisha, 290 
Gishkliu, Gishukh, former readings 

of the name of ,Umma, 21 
Gladstone, Dr. J. H., 73 
Gods, racial character of Sumcrian, 

\47 ff. ; earliest Babylonian, 84 f. ; 
Sumerian and Egyptian, 325 ; 
symbols for Egyptian, 329 

Gold, despatch of, 237 

Gold-dust, 261 

Grain, as tribute, 127 ; fees of, 182 ; 
trade in, 237 ; value of land 
reckoned in, 207 

Grain-barges, 235, 262 

Granary-inspectors, 181 

Grand vizir, seal of, 236 

Graves, at Fara, 26 f. ; at Surghul 
and El-Hibba, 21 f. ; at Abti 
Hatab, 30 ; at Mukayyar, 30, 35 ; 
at Warka, 34 ; at Babylon, 30, 37 ; 
at Susa, 331 f . ; at Mussian, 2 ; in 
Egypt, 2, 326 ; spe also Burial 

Greece, 341, 345, 347 

Greek civilization, 1 

Greek cross, 342 

Greeks, 346 

Grove, sacred, 189 

Gu-edin, sacred land of Ningirsu, 
117, 121 f., 126, 162 ; its free- 
dom from taxation, 271 ; divisions 
of, 127 ; Stele of, 154 

Gubi, 262 

Gubin, 261 

Gudea, patesi of Lagash, 42 f., 47, 
54, 242, 255, 279, 300, 348 ; reign 
of, 259 ff.; date of, 61, 64, 256, 
276; buildings of, 18 f., 90 f., 
264 ff., 332 ; mmuments of, 47 f, 

259 f., 270; statutes of, 70 f., 

260 ff., 269 ; seal of, 48, 270 ; 
cylinders of, 260, 266 f. ; sculpture 
of the period of, 66, 263, 333 ; 
character of, 271 f. ; deification of. 

272 ff. ; cult of, 274, 299 ; in 

chronological table, 361 
Gula, 113 f. 
Gungunu, king of Ur, 311 ; in 

chronological table, 362 
Gunidu, father of Ur-Ninii, 106 
Gursar, grandfather of Ur-Kina, 106 
Gutebu, 301 
Gutiu, 55, 238 ; slaves from, 238 

Hadadnadinakhe, palace of, 18 
Haematite, for face-paint, 330 
Hagios Onuphrios, 346 
Hair, treatment of the, 40 ff., 72, 97, 

Halbherr, Prof., 346 
Halevy, J., 4 ff., 52 
Hall, H. R., 12, 266, 324, 334, 341, 

343, 345 
Ham mam, 9, 23 
Hammurabi, 9, 43, 162, 184, 307, 

317 f., 345, 348 
Harp, Sumerian form of, 69 
Harpoon, Egyptian kingdom of the, 

Harran, 197 

Head-dresses, forms of divine, 51, 133 
Hearst Expedition, 328 
Hebrews, 132 
Helm, Otto, 73 
Helmets, Sumerian, 137 f. ; of 

Naram-Sin, 243 
Hepatoscopy, Sumerian origin of, 

Herodotus, 40, 332 
Hetime, 30 f. 
Heuzey, Lt^on, 18, 48, 66, 68, 70, 

72 f., 77, 92, 95 ff., 99 f., 107, 111, 

151, 166, 219, 229, 241, 244, 247, 

255, 263, 265, 269 f., 293, 296, 344 
Hieroglyphs, Egyptian, 325 ; Hittite, 

339 ; Minoan, 345 ; on Phaestos 

disk, 346 
HiUa, 38 
Hilprecht, Prof. H. V., 9, 17, 49, 

59 f., 64, 73 f., 86, 98, 102 f., 163, 

165, 168, 170, 193, 197, 205, 219, 

226, 244, 279, 311 ff., 319 
Hit, 7 
Hittite culture, 347 ; cylinder-seals, 

344 ; script, 339 ; power, 347 
Hogarth, D. G., 346 f. 
Hommel, Prof. Fritz, 9, 14, 313 
Honey, for embalming, 332 
Horse, introduction of the, 162 
Horus, 324 f. 
Hoschander, J., 206 
Hroziiy, F., 14, 21, 206, 211, 317 
Hiiber, E., 284 
Hulvan, 260 



Human-headed bulls. 77, 330 
Hunger, J., 183 

Huntington, Ellsworth, 352, 354 
Huntsman, in suite of Semitic prince, 

Hyksos, 334 

Iabiutbal, 317 

Ibalpel, patesi of Ashnunnak, 306 

Ibalum, 209 

Ibi-Sin, king of Ur, 297, 299 f., 304, 

308 ; in chronological table, 362 
Ibla, 261 
Ibn Rusta, 8 
Ibn Serapion, 8 
Ibni-sharru, seal of, 217, 251 
Idin-Dagan, king of Isin, 310; in 

chronological table, 362 
Idin-ilu, patesi of Kisurra, 284 
Ikhi, 301 
Hi, patesi of Umma, 1G3 f. ; in 

chronological table, 360 
ni-Urumush, 203 f. 
Hishma, 231, 243 f . 
Ilsu-rabi, patesi of Basime, 209 
Ilu-bani, 344 
Iluma-ilu, 32 

Imagery, in Sumerian art, 77 
Imgig, the lion-headed eagle of 

Ningirsu, 98 
Impae, 185 
Imprecations, 143 
Indian Ocean, 78 
Indo-Europeans, 54 
Inlaying, 74 ff. 

Inspectors, Sumerian, 179 ^. 
Invocations, 128 f., 148 
Iran, 341, 357 f. 
Iranian plateau, 335, 358 
Iron, 50 
Irrigation, in Babylonia and Egypt, 

323 ; methods of, 154 f. ; oxen for, 

lahbi-Ura, king of Isin, 303, 308 ff. ; 

in chronological table, 362 
Ishkun-Sin, 281 
Ishme-Dagan, king of Isin, 310 f. ; 

in chronological table, 3G2 
Tahnunuk, Anzanite form of the 

name Ashnunnak, 212 
Ishtar, 33, 220 f., 250, 259, 289 
Isin, in r>unier, 13 ; the Dynasty of, 

63 f., 309 ff. ; racial character of 

the kings of, 283 f . , 303 ; relation 

of its dynasty to that of Babylon, 

313 ff. 
Isis, 324 

Itaddu I., patesi of Susa, 305 
Itaddu II., patesi of Susa, 305 

Iter-kaelia, king of Liin, 312; in 

chronological table, 3C2 
Itfir-Shamash, 284 
Ivory, 78, 332 
Izinum, seal of, 246 

Jastrow, Prof. .Morris, 205 

Jensen, Prof. P., 39, 54 f., 109, 211 

J^quier, G., 339 

JcAvellory, Elamite, 337 

Jidr, 31 

Jokha, site of Umma, 9, 21 f. ; plan 

of, 22 ; cones from, 23 ; tablets 

from, 295 

Ka-azag, patesi of Lagash, 235, 257 ; 

in chronological table, .'-Ol 
Ka-azag, father of NinkaLjina, 255 
Kadi, 101 : temple of, 285 
Kagalad, 261 

Kal-Rukhuiatir, patesi of SJiisa, .".05 
Kal-Uli, ancestor of Kuk-Naahur, 

Kaiki, seal of, 246 
Kanizi, early odioial of Shuruppak, 

Kara-Uyuk, pottery from, 341 ; 

tablets from, 346 
Kardaka, 301 
Karkar, 164 

Kashtubila, of Kazallu. 227 
Kassite Dyn.isty, of Baliylon, 62 f. ; 

period, 38, 89, 339, 342 
Kaasites, 162 
Kazallu, 227, 286, 319 
Kengi, 14 

Ker Porter, Sir R., 39 
Kerkha, 335 
Kermanshah, 340 
Kesh, 13, 128, 152 
KhubQr, 347 
Khakhu, 201 
Khala-Lama. daughter of Galu- 

khazal, 296 
Khaladda, patesi of Shuruppak, 28, 

Khamasi, 301 
Kliamazi, 103 

Kharakene, kingdom of, 18 
Kharshi, Kharislii, 287 f., 290 
Khashkhamer, pateai of lahkun-Siu, 

281, 284 
Khcgir, 185 
Khenda, I'M) 
Khotan, 351 ff. 

Khukhnuri, Khukhumiri, 290, 299 
Khuluppu-trees, 261 
Khummatur, possible reading of the 

name Lumma'lur, 161 
Khumurti, 287 f. 



Khnnnir.i, patesi of Kimash, 291 
Kluirshitu, site of, 287 
Khutran-tepti, Elaiuite dynasty of, 

305 f . 
Ki-babbar, 147 
Ki-uri, 14 
Ki-mra, 14 
Kiab, 100 
Kianki, 195 f. 
Klids, fees of, 181 f. 
Kilulla. Peai of, 284 
Kimash, 2G1, 288, 290 f. 
Kinej, early signification of the title, 

Kiugi, 14 

Kinsja, deification of, 203, 222, 251 , 
273 f., 288, 298 f., 300 IT., 310, 335 ; 
Babylonian list of, 01 f. 
Kinvuiir, 100 
Kinuan, 357 

Kisari, king of Gankhar, 308 
Kish, site of, 8 f.,. 38 f. ; earliest 
kings of, 53, 99 ff., 202 f. ; Su- 
merian victories over, 144 fl'., 152, 
201 f. ; later kingdom of, 53, 65, 
198, 203 ff., 210 f., 214 f., 226, 228, 
230 ff., 249, 252; deification of kings 
of, 251 ; purchase of land at, 206 ; 
commercial relations with Lagash, 
238 ; under Sumu-abu, 319 
Kisurra, site of, 9 f, ; excavations at, 
28 fi". ; destruction of, 31 f . ; brick 
from, 284 ; see also Abu Hatab 
Knives, panels from handles of, 81 
Knossos, 345 f. 
Koldewey, Dr. Robert, 20 f., 24, 37, 

157, 160 
Komorof, Gen., 355 
Kopet Dagh, 354 f., 357 
Koptos, 324 
Kubadh I., 8 
Kudur-Xankhundi, king of Elam, 

304 If. 
Kudurru-inscriptions, 143 
Kfifa, 8, 10 
Kugler, F. X., 297 
Kuk-Kirmesh, sukkal of Elani, 300 f. 
Kuk-Nashur, or Kukka-Nashtr, 

sukkal of Elani, 306 f. 
Kur-shesh, patesi of Umma, 209 ; in 

clironological table, 360 
Kurdistan, 86, 251 
Kurgans, at Anau, 2, 355 f. 
Kuriia, 8 
Kfit el-'AniAra, 8 
Kutir-Nakhkhunte, 306 f. 
Kutu, 232, 244 

Kuyunjik, 217 ; painted pottery 
from, 343 ; Neolithic settlement 
at, 343 

Laoash, 11, 13 ; name and site of, 
17 ; excavations at, 17 ff. ; des- 
truction of, 20, 31 f. ; early history 
of, 84, 98 ff. ; under Eannatuni 
and his successors, 120 ff. ; sack 
of, 186 ff. ; under Erech and Ur, 
197, 200; under Semitic domina- 
tion, 205, 244, 247 ff. ; later rulers 
of, 252 ff. ; in the kingdom of 
Sumer and Akkad, 277 ; under 
the Dynasty of Ur, 290 f., 296, 
298 f. ; emblem of, 78, 98, 100, 
131, 160, 167, 174 f. ; see also 

Lagrange, Pere M. J., 341 

Lament on the fall of Lagash, 188 ff., 

Lampre, G., 340, 356 

Lance, votive, 229 

Lance-bearers, Sunierian, 137 

Land, system of tenure, 95 ; pur- 
chase of, 206 ff. 

Langdon, S., 51, 54, 57, 159 

Lankuku, 306 

Lapis-lazuli, 74 f., 104, 158, 200, 
270, 357 

Larsa, site of, 9 f. ; excavations at, 
34 ; as cult-centre, 84 f. ; historv 
of, 147, 162, 195 f., 281, 310 f', 
313, 317 f. ; see also Senkera 

Lasirab, king of Gutiu, 250 

Laws, Sumerian, 184 ; of Urukagina, 
182 ff. ; of Hammurabi. 184 ; of 
Nina and NingLrsu, 272 ; of the 
Sun-god, 282 ; see also Code 

Le Strange, G., 8 

Lebanon, 225, 334 

Legends, Sumerian, 175 ; Semitic, 
77 ; Eu'yptian, 323 f. ; of Sargon, 
217, 226, 232 

Legge, F., 329 f. 

Lehmann-Haupt, Prof. C. F., 61,63 

Letters, royal, 238 ; earliest ex- 
ample of a, 172 

Libations, 48 f., 68, 140, 198 

Libation-vase, 76 f. 

Libation- water, 68 

Libit-Ishtar, king of Isin, 284, 310 f. ; 
in chronological table, 302 

Libit-Ishtar, governor of Sippar, 
315 f. 

Libyan settlers, in Egypt, 334 

Lidda, child of Ur-Nina, 112 ; sex 
of, 115tr. 

Likhatcheff, M., 173 

Limestone, inlaying with, 212 

Line-characters, 329 

Lion, in decoration, 70, 79 f., 99 f., 
229, 270 f. 

Lion-headed eagle, of Ningirsu, 98 f. 



Lipum, patesi of Anslian, 292 

Lipush-I;vu, 'J4G 

Literature, intluenco of Sumcrian, 

Liver-omens, 233 
Loan-words, 02 
Loaves, fees of, 181 f. ; as offerings, 

Loczy, Prof, de, 353 
Loe-=s, 353 f. 

Loftus, W. K., 5, 9, 17, 28, 32 ff., 73 
Jjoin-cloth, Semitic, 42 
Lower Egypt, 325, 334 
Lower Sea, the Persian Gulf, 194, 

197, 2(32 
Lower Worlds 274 ; see aho Under- 

Lu-enna, priest of Ninmar, letter 

from, 172 
Lugunutur, wife of Enlitarzi, 170, patesi of Lagash, 1(59 ff., 
273 ; sealings of, 173 ti'. ; full name 
of, 169 ; in chronological table, 
Lugal-andanushuga ; tee Lugal-anda 
Lugal-bur, patesi of Lagash, 254 f. ; 

in chronological tay)le, 361 
Lugal-ezen, 112 f. , 115 
liUgal-ezendug, patesi of Nippur, 294 
Lugal-kigub-nidudu, king of Erecli 
and Ur, 199 ff. ; in chronological 
table, 300 
Lusjal-kisalsi, kinjr of Erech and Ur, 
199 f., 268 ; in clironological table, 
360, 267 

Lugal-magurri, yjatesi of Ur and | 
commauder of the fortress, 299, 
Lugal-me, 272 

Lugal-shag-engur, patesi of Lagash, 
99 f., 209 f. ; in chronological 
table, 360 
Lugal-sisa, 267 
Lugal-tarsi, king of Kish, 104 ; in 

chronological table, 360 
Lugal-uru, 109, 168 ; temple of, 190 
Lngal-ushumgal, patesi of Lagash, 
236 f., 241, 253 ff., 279 ; in chrono- 
logical table, 361 
Lugal-zaggisi, king of Erech, 52, 163, 
214 ; his sack of Lagash, 188 ff., 
210 ; reign of, 193 ff. ; his western 
expedition, 197 f. , 233, 335 ; in 
chronological table, 360 
Lulubu, 55, 242, 250, 287 f. 
Lummadinidug Canal, 153, 101, 168 
Lummagirnunta Canal, 154, 162 
Lupad, 96 f. 
Lyre-player, to the Moon-god 246 

MArK-nEAP.s,inBabvhiniftftnl E.rj'pt, 
322, 333; of Meailun, 80, 9u"; of 
Shar-Gani-sharri, 218 ; of L;u»irab, 
250 ; of Gudea, 270 f. ; aupport* 
for ceremonial, 111 

Maciver, Prof. D. llandall, 327 

Madera, 261,291 

Madka, 291 

Magan, 14, 21.'*, 2.".S. 211 f., 258, 262 

Ma'er, Mari, 97 f., 146 

iMagician, royal, 230 

Makhar, 290 

Makkan, 14 

IVIal-Amir, 336 

Malachite, for face-paint, 330 

Managers, of estates, 2U7 f. 

Manishdussu, Manishduzzu, Anzanito 
forms of the name M.-ini-shtusu, 206 

Manishtusu, king of Kish, 206 ff. ; 
campaigns of, 211 f., 224, 231 ; 
obelisk of, 95, 176, 203, 206 ff., 
222, 238 ; statues of, 212 f. ; cruci- 
form monument probably to bo 
assigned to, 223 f. ; date of, 53, 
65, 210 f. ; in chronological table, 

Mannu-dannu, prince of Magan, 227, 

Mantle, Sumerian, 42 

Map, Babylonian, of the world, 313 

Miir-Islitar, seal of, 344 

Marad, 206 

IMardin, 244 

Marduk, 240, 294 ; origin of emblem 
of, 342 

Mari ; see Ma'er 

Markharshi, 286, 290 

Marsli, of NinkJiar.'^a-, 206 

Martu (Amurru), a West Semitic god, 

iMa.siam-Ishtar, 303 

JMaspero, Prof, (l., 324 

Mash-Shuruppak, early oflScial of 
Shuruppak, 95 

Ma8taba-t<jmb, of Aha, 323 

Mat-burials, 3, 20 f. 

Mat-weaving, p]gyptian, 328 

Median Wall, 38 

Mediterranean, culture, 2 ; Lugal- 
zaggisi 's e.xpcdition to, 197 f. ; 
Sargon and the, 225, 233 ff. 251. 
343 ff. ; Gudea's sunplios from, 
262, 279 ; Gimil-Sin and the, 300 

Mois.snor, Pmf. B., 17, 304, 309, 316 

Melukhkha. 2.38, 261 f. 

Memphis, 324 

Mena, 324 

Menant, J.. 217 f., 246 

MunOdir, 31 

Menua, 261 

•J B 2 



IVfenudgid, 113 

IMinoan hierogl3'phs, 345 

Merv, 354 ; oasis of, 351, 354 

Mes, 194 f. 

Mesalim, son of Manishtusu, 200 f, 

IVfcsamhi, slaves dedicated to, 184 

Mesilini, king of Kish, 53, 65, 80, 
5)9 ff., 159, 209 ; in chr.mological 
table, 300 

Mcslamtaca, 284 ; temple to, 2G4 

JVlesniu, 324 

Mesopotamia, 7 

Messengers, roj'al, 201 

Messerschuiidt, L., 21, 52, 157 

Metal - casting. Siimerian, 72 fT. ; 
Egyptian, 327 ; Elamite, 337 

Metal-work, engraved, 78, 167. 229 

Meyer, Tn.f. Edouard, 40, 47 if., 
50 tf., 62, 66, 73, 97, 110, 178, 184, 
244, 284, 306, 313, 334 

Migrations, causes of, 354 

Minotaurs, 346 

Mishime, 150 f. 

Mjelli, 31 

Mongols, 54 

Monsters, in Sumerian art, 7C 

Moon-god, 45 ; dress of the, 4.8 ; see 
also Enzu, Nannar, Sin 

Moon-cult, 84 f. 

Mosaic legislation, 348 

Mother-of-pearl, 74 f., 81 f. 

Moulds, for casting, 74 ; for bricks, 

Mukayyar, site of Ur, 34 ; excava- 
tions at, 34 f. ; plan of, 34 ; con- 
tracted burials at, 30, 331 ; in- 
scrii-tions from, 217, 280, 310 f. 

IMunimilication, 331 f. 

Muninnikurta, 112, 115 

Murik-Tidnim, the Wall of the West, 

Musayyib, 10 

Mussian, excavations at, 2, 340 ; 
painted pottery from, 340 f., 356 

Mycenaean ej)och, 1 

Myres, Prof. J. L., 343 f. 

Mythological beings, 174 f. 

Nabataeaxs, 40 
Kabonidus, GO ff., 216 ff., 268 
Naga-ed-DCr, 326 
Nagidda, patesi of Adamdun, 292 
Nahr Uindiya, 10 
Nakada, 323, 330 
Naksu, 240, 278 
Nalua-stone, 261 
Namazua, 115 
Names, symbolical, 272 f. 
Nanimakhui, patesi of Lagash, 255, 
258 ; in chronological table, 361 

Nana, 12, 84, 146 f., ."04 f. 

Nannar, Moon-god of Ur, 84, 280, 
294 f., 298 

Nainiar-gugal Canal, 281 f. 

Naram-!Sin, king of Akkad, reign of, 
241 fi". ; buildings of, 37,88 f., 219, 
235, 244 f. ; date of, 60 ff., 65, 203, 

216, 218, 253; successors of, 246, 
278; dress of, 42; his Stele of 
Victory, 228 f. , 243, 251 ; the Pir 
Hussein Stele, 244 ff. ; Omens of, 

217, 241 ; titles of, 242, 251 ; dei- 
fication of, 251, 343 f. ; iu chrono- 
logical table, 361 

Narmer, 324 

Naruti, 212 f. 

Natik Effendi, 245 

Naturalistic treatment, in Sumerian 
design, 80 f. ; in early Semitic 
sculpture, 252 

Naville, Prof. E., 324, 326 f., 332 

Nebuchadnezzar II.. 37 f. 

Nekhune, 290 

Neo-Anzanite texts, 337 

Neolithic period, in Babylonia, 2 f., 
322, 342 f. ; remains of, at Nineveh, 
343 ; at Susa, 340 ; at Mussian, 2, 
340 ; at Anau, 2, 341 ; in Egypt, 
1 f., 323 ; iu Aegean and Mediter- 
ranean areas, 1 f. ; in Northern 
Greece, 341 ; wares of the, 340 fl". 

Nergal, 38, 289, 293 

Nets, of the gods, 128 ff., 165, 220, 

New Moon, Feast of the, 298 £. 

Newberry, P. E., 325, 334 

Nidaba, 190 f., 194, 196, 266 

Niebuhr, Carl, 219 

Nitfer, site of Nippur, 8 f . , 85 ; ex- 
cavations at, 86 ; votive inscrip- 
tions from, 204, 206 ; dated tablets 
from, 309 ; contracted burials at, 
331 ; see also Nippur 

Nin-az<ag-nim, 259 

Nin-Isin, 313 

Nina, goddess, 108. Ill, 152 f., 164 f., 
168, 185, 190, 206, 254 f., 264, 260, 
271 f., 275, 296 

Nina, division of Lagash, 108 

Ninab, possible reading of the name 
Ninni-esh, 163 

Ninabukhadu, 194 f. 

Ninagal, 259 

Nindar, 190, 259, 264 

Nindub, 266 

Nineveii, 4 ; Neolithic settlement at, 

Ningal, 298 

Niu'^andu, wife of Nammakhni, 255 

Ningirsu, 4.3, 84, 127, 156, 164 If., 


168, 172, 177, 180 f., 184 f., 100 f., 
•2i>[K L"7] ; temple of. 89 f., 95. W f., 
108 f., Ill, 113, 123, 155, '2m iW, 
298 ; laws of, 272 ; emblem of, 98, 
100, l75 ; representations of, G7, 
130 f., 150 

2^ingirsu-ushumg;\l Canal, 271 

Uiiigish/.iila, Oudca's patron deity, 
47, 108, 204, 260; monsters of, 
76 f. ; temple of, 264, 269, 273 ; 
representation of, 47 


I^inkagina, 255 

Isinkharsag, 13, 121, 127 f., 148, 108, 
194, 289 ; temple of, 259, 264, 269, 
273 ; Marsh of, 206 

Ninki, 128 f. 

Ninlil, 104, 281 

Ninmakh, 168, 189 

Jsinmar, 108, 172, 259, 296 

Ninni, 84, 104, 145, 194, 310 ; lier 
temple at Erech, 33, 196, 280, 208 ; 
her temples at Lagash, 161, 190, 
259, 264 ; her temple at Ninni-esh, 
244 ; representations of, 135, 250 

J^inni-esh, 163, 195 £., 238, 244 

Ninsar, 185 

Jfinshakh, Urukagina's patron deity, 

Nintud, 273 

Niphates, 11 

Isippur, site of, 8 f. ; excavations at, 
32, 85 ff. ; early Babj'lonian plan 
of, 87 ; plan of the inner city at, 
86, 88 ; character and history of, 
13, 51 f., 85 «•., 98, 107, 185, 198, 
238, 293 f., 310 f. ; buildings at, 
86 ff., 219, 235, 244, 281, 345 ; 
objects and inscrij^tions from, 48 f ., 
73, 102 f., 193. 199, 201, 279 f., 
311 ; see aho Niflfer 

Koeldekc, A., 24 f., 28 f. 

North Africa. 323, 352 

Northern Babylonia. Semitic immi- 
gration into, 214, 230, 250 f., 358 ; 
see aho Akkad 

Northern China, 353 

Northern Greece, prehistoric pottery 
from, 341 

Northern Syria, 347 

Nubia, 327 

Nudubtum, seal of. 344 

Nuffar, 85 ; see X ffer 

Numeration, systems of, 339 

Nusku, 294 

Nutugmushda, 286 

Oa>:nxs, 53 

Oaths, ratification of, 128 

Obelisk, of Manishtusu, 95, 176, 203 ; 

description of, 206 ff. ; names ft.)m, 

222, 238 
Obsidian implements, from Kuyun- 

jik, 343 
Offerings, votive, 109 ; funerary, 

140 f. 
Ollicials, 179 ff. ; orders for supplien 

for, 290 f. 
Ohnefalsch-Ilichter, M. H., 344 
Oil. divination by, 183 ; for embahu- 

ing, 332 
Omen-texts, historical traditions in, 

200, 219, 304, 309 
! Omens, of Sargon and Naram-Sin, 

217, 219 f., 224 f., 233 ff., 240 l., 

consulUilion of the, 266, 348 
Opis. site of, 11. 13, 38 f. ; history of, 

145 f., 152, 202. 226 
Oppert, Jules, 4, 217 f. 
Overseers, of lauded jiroperty, 207 f., 

210 f. 

Paintixg, of the body, 27 

l-'alace-chamberlain, 276 

Palace Tell, at Tello, 18, 90 f. 

Palaeoliths, 2 

Palaikastro, 346 f. 

Palermo Stele, 334 

Palettes, early Egyptian, 27, 330 

Pamirs, 351 

Parthian fortress, 89 ; palace, 18 

Patesi, signitication of the title, llHl 

in relation to the city-god, 101 f. 

181, 268 ; decrease in inlluencc of, 

173, 295 f., 302 
Patron doities, 47, 108 f., 177, 264, | 

266; on cylinder-seals, 344 
Perforated plaques, 68, 98, 110 f. 
Perquisites, of the priesthood, 180 S. 
I\Trot, G., 66 
Persia, 1, 39, 55, 245 
Persian Gulf, 6 f., 5.3. G2 f.. 211, 

234 f., 242, 251, 262, 279, 3l.'U 
Petrie, I'ruf. VV. M. Flinders, lio^), 

Petticoat, Sumerian, 42 f. 
Pliaestos, 346 ; disk from, 340 
Pictographs, Minoan, 'Mb 
Pictorial writing, systems of, 328 f. 
Picture characters, 3 
Pilasters, 264 
Pinches, T. G., 218 
Pir Hussein, 42, 244 f. 
Plaid, Semitic, 42 
Plans, Babvlonian, 87 f., 260, 265 
Plane-trees, 201 
Plano-convex bricks, 26, 35, 9J, 04, 

Plaater, 262 
Plating, with copper, 74 


exactions of the, 
system of writing, 


Pocbel, A., G3. 312 

I'Dpulation, tninsfarence of, 208, 
238 ff. 

Post-Sargonic, use of term, 21G, 228 

I'ot-burials, 30, 31, 37 

Pottery, Sunieri.m, 3, 342 ; Elamite, 
340 f. ; Cappadocian, 341 ; Egyp- 
tian, 320 ff. 

Prayer, of (U>(lication, 198 

I'retlynastic Egyptians, 323 ff. 

I'rehistoric period, in Babylonia, 2 f., 
84 ff., 322. 343 ; in Elam, 2, 33'J 
f., 342; in Egypt, If., 322 ir. 

Pre-Sargonic, use of term, 21(», 228 

Presents, accompanying a sale of 
land. 05, 207 

Price, Prof. Ira M., 266 

Prices, regulation of, 182 

Priesthood, power of the Sumerian, 
__^ 167 f., 172 f. 
---7 180 f. 

338 f . 

Ptolemaic Canon, 62 

Pukhia, king of Khurshitu, 287 

Pumpelly, llaphaol, 2, 332, 341 
f., 357 ; expeditions of, 351 &'. 

Punt, 334 

Pilr-Sagale, 62 

Pdr-Sin ; see Bur-Sin 

Purilioation, rites of, 266 f. 

Racial types, 41 f., 44 f. 

lladau, Hugo, 61, 109, 112, 115, 151, 

Ranke, H., 313,315 
Rassam, H., 37 

Rawlinson, Sir H. C, 4, 6, 217 
Red Sea, 323 f. 
Reed, of Enki, 108 
Roods, huts of, 84 ; roofs of, 94 
Reisner, G. A., 14, 17, 324, 326 ff. 
Reservoirs, 154 f., 168, 185 
Revenue, farming of tlie, 181 
Revolts, ag.iinst, 224, 

227, 231; against Sargon, 227, 

Rhodes, 344 
Richthofon, Baron Ferdinand von, 

Rim-Sin, king of Larsa, 3], 314, 

316 fr. 
Rimusli, probable reading of the 

name Urumush, 203 
Ringed staff, as emblem, 77 
Rfsh-Adad, king of Apirak, 241 
Ritual, Sumerian, 265 f., 2G8, 348 
Rogers, I'mf. R. W., 17 
Romans, 346 
Rule, architect's, 265 

Russian Turkestan, 332, 341, 351 f.,, 

Sab-Dagan, 313 
Sabu, in Elam, 290, 301 f. 
Sacrifice, 140 
Sagantug. 113, 116 
fca'id Muhammad, 28 
Sakjegeuzi, potsherds from, 341 
Sakli, 226 

Sale, deeds of, 95 f., 160, 170 f.,. 
206 ir. 

San)arra, 7, 39 

Samawa, 10 

Samsu-iluiia, 9, 31 f., 89, 162, 317 

Samaun, 245 

Sand-dunes, origin of, .'553 

Sandals, introduction of, 51 

Sangu-priest, 163 

Sarcopliagus-burials, .3, 26 f., 34 f, 

Sargon of Agade, 216 ff. ; historical 
character of, 216, 219, 224 ff. ; 
his identification with Shar-Gani- 
sharri, 216 ff., 220 fi"., 227 f. ; age 
of, 60 11'. ; Legend of, 217, 226, 
232 ; Omens of, 217, 219 f., 224 f., 
2.33 ff., 240; Chronicle of, 22(», 
225; "sons of the palace" of^ 

Sargon ids, 337 

Sas.sanian period, 8, 31 

Satuni, king of Lulnbu, 242 f. 

Sayce, Prof. A. H., 4, 73, 291, 324 f., 
341, 345 

Schfifer, Ileinrich, 334 

ScheU, Pere V., 21, 37, 206, 209, 
211 ff., 220 ff., 228, 241, 244, 272, 
290 f., 295, 297, 299, 305 ff'., 310 f., 
314, 319, .336, 338 

Schmidt, Dr. Hubert, 341, 351 f., 355 

Schnabel, I*. , 63 

Schrader, Eberhard, 4, 109 

Sculpture, Sumerian, 3, 28, 66 ff., 
129 ff., 252, 269 f., 333, 348; 
early Semitic, 66, 213 220 f., 228 f., 
251 f. ; Elamite, 337 ; Egyptian, 

Sea, of the West, 234 
Soa-country, 32, 53, 62 f., 235 
Seal-cutting, 175 f. 
Seal-impressions, proto-Elamite, 339 
Seal-stones, Cretan, 345 f. 
Sealings, 3, 27, 170, 173 ff., 236 f., 

Sebene Su, 245 
Seistan, 3.57 
Seleucia, 39 
Semiramis, 38 
Semites, racial characteristics of, 

40 ff., 216 f. ; innnigrationa of. 




47 ff. , 53, 55, 203, 214, 230 f., 238, 
250 f., 336, 347 ; cause of Semitic 
migrations, 358 ; domination of, 
203 ff., 216 ff., 247, 249, 263, 320; 
influence of, 66 f., 214, 334; sculp- 
ture of, 213, 220 f., 228 f., 243, 
251, 253 ; hypothetical Egyptian 
invasion of, 323 ff., 328 

Semitisms, 52 

Senkera, site of Larsa, 9 ; excava- 
tions at, 34 ; inscriptions from, 
281, 311, 314 

Sennacherib, 37, 217, 235 

Ser-i-Pul-i-Zohab, 250 

Serpents, in Sumerian art, 76 

Shabara, 290 

Shad-Bitkim, Field of, 206 

Shagarakti-Buriash, 268 

Shagpada, 190 

Shagshag, wife of Urukagina, 170, 
176, 273 

Shakanshabar, 267 f . 

Shakh, conquest of, 150 

Shakh, royal steward, 170 

Shakh-Bau, 171 

Shamash, 212, 218, 223, 231, 244, 289 

Shar-Gani-sharri, king of Akkad, 
reign of, 216 ff. ; his identification 
with Sargon, 216 ff., 220 ff., 227 f. ; 
conquests of, 225 ff., 233, 240, 335, 
343 ; in relation to Cyprus, 234 f., 
343 f. ; administrative system of, 
236 ff. ; empire of, 197 f., 203, 
215, 252; buildings of, 199, 219, 
226, 235 f. ; mace-head of, 218 ; 
stele of victory possibly his, 248 f . ; 
name of, 218, 228 ; deification of, 
261 ; date of, 65 ; in chronological 
table, 361 

Sharlak. king of Kutfl, 232 

Sharru-Gi, king of Kish, 221 ff., 
248 ; Stele of, 132, 220 f., 228 ff. ; 
name of, 221 f., 224, 227 f. ; s(m 
of, 223 ; date of, 53, 65, 222 ; in 
chronological table, 360 

Sharru-Gi- ili, 222 

Sharru-uktn, 217, 221, 228 

Shashru, 288, 299 

Shatra, 112 

Shatt 'Ateshan, 10 

Shatt el-' Arab, 18 

Shatt el-Farakhnn, 11 

Shatt el-Hai, 8, 11, 21, 31, 101 

Shatt el-Kar, 8 f., 11, 21, 23 f., 28, 31 

Shatt en-Nil, 8 f., 86, 89 

Shaving, Sumerian practice of, 40 ff., 

Shekh Bedr, 11 

Shell, Sumerian use of, 41, 76. 78 ff ,332 

Shemsu-Hor, 324 

Shid-tab, 206 

Shields, Sumerian, 137 f., 286 

Shilkhak-In-Shushiniik , 336 

Shilkhakha, sukkal of Elam, 306 

Shiniash, 290 

Shimbi-ishkhuk, 289 

Ships, 262, 334 

Shirpurla, Layash, 17 ; see Lagash 

Shirukdu', Shirukdukh, sukkal of 
Elam, 306 f. 

Shrines, local, 84 f. 

Shumenl, 14 

Shumu-abi, 307 

Shunet ez-Zebib, 323 

Shurippak, 9 

Shuruppak, site of, 9 f. ; excava- 
tions at, 24 ff. ; destruction of, 
31 f. ; god of, 84 ; inscriptions 
from, 95, 283 ; see also Fara 

Shushinak, 290, 337 

Shutruk-Nakhkliunte, 212, 243, 337 

Sigbirra, 155 

Sigiresh, 290 

Silver, engraving upon, 78, 167 ; as 
standard of exchange, 207 ; from 
the mountains, 262 

Simanu, 299 

Simash, 306, 308 

Simashgi, 290 

Simebalai-khuppak, sukkal of Elam, 

Simuru, 287 f., 299 

Sin, 244, 289 ; see also Nannar 

Sin-idinnam, 9 

Sin-ikisha, king of Isin, 309, 312 f., 
319 ; in chronological table, 302 

Sin-magir, king of Isin, 309, 319 ; 
in chronological table, 3(52 

Sin-muballit, 63 f., 314, 316 ff. 

Sinai, 40 

Sinaitic peninsula, 242 

Sippar, site of, 8 f., 13 ; excavations 
at, 37 ; history of, 85, 203, 20.">, 
212, 218, 223, 244, 250, 310, 319 ; 
see also Abd Habba 

Siri, 290 

Siu, 290 

Skins, clothing of, 42, 138 

Skulls, measurement of, 328 

Slate-carvings, Egyptian, 322, 324, 
330, 334 

Slavery, 184 

Slaves, public, 300; sacred, 184; 
foreign, 2:58 ; recruiting of, 291 f. 

Smith, Dr. Elliot, 328 

Smith, George, 39, 217 f. 

Sneferu, 334 

Somaliland, 334 

Sorcerers, 207 

Southern Arabia, 323, 334 



Sj)ear, or lance, Sumerian use of, 

Spouting vase, symbol of the, 48 

Stamps, for reliefs, 106 

Standards, carried in battle, 243 ; 
of a goddess, 133 

Statues, Sumerian, 71 f. ; early Se- 
mitic, 212 f. : of Manishtusu, 
212 f. ; of Ur-Bau, 70 ; of Gudea, 
70 f., 200 ff., 269; eymbolical 
names for, 272 f. ; offerings to, 
272 f. ; significance of, 273 

Stein, M. Aurel, 351 ff., 367 

Stelap, of delimitation, 122, 126 ff., 
164 : of victory, 143, 228, 243, 
247 ff., 251 

Stewards, 170, 246 

Stilus, 265, 345 

Stone, rare in Sumer, 202 ; Egyp- 
tian vessels of, 327 

Storehouses, 91 ff., 185, 297 

Storm-god, West Semitic, 344 

Strong drink, fees of, 181 

Su-people, 301 

Subartu, 227 

Suk el-'Afej, 9, 85 

Sukkal-makh, title, 301 

Sukkallu, significance of title, 306 ff. 

Sumer, limits of, 6 f. , 12 f. ; names 
for, 13 ff. ; inhabitants of, 40 ff. ; 
system of land tenure in, 95 

Sumerian civilization, age of, 56 ff. ; 
achievements of, 66 ff. ; influence 
of, 321 ff. ; Sumerian reaction, 
under the kings of Ur, 48, 253, 
283 f. ; "Sumerian controversy," 

Sumerians, racial characteristics of, 
40 ff. ; racial affinity of, 54 f. ; 
female types of, 71 f. ; position of 
women among, 116, 286 ; original 
home of, 53 f ., 351, 357 f. ; earliest 
settlements of, 3, 84 ff., 90 ff. ; 
their weapons and method of fight- 
ing, 50, 130 f., 286 f. ; close of 
political career of, 320 

Sumu-abu, 307, 319 

Sumu-ilu, king of Ur, 313 ; in 
chronological table, 362 

Sun-god, temples of, 37, 186, 189, 
311 ; laws of, 184, 282 ; see also 
Babbar, Shamash 

Sun-worship, Babvlonian centres of, 
84 f. ; Egyptian, 334 

Sunanam, 150 

Surghul, 89, 331, 345 ; excavations 
at, 20 f. 

Susa, excavations at, 2, 39 f., 206, 
305, 335, 339 f., 356 ; first settle- 
ment at, 330 f. ; earliest form of 

burial at, 331 f. ; " second period " 
at. 333 ; objects from, 211 ff., 216, 
220, 241, 243, 330, 333 ; early 
patesis of, 231, 243 ; native Ela- 
mite rulers of, 305 ff. ; history of, 
243, 261 f., 284, 290 f., 299, 304 

Symbolism, in writing, 329 f. 

Synchronisms, 67, 62 ff., 256 f., 276, 

Syria, 65, 225, 234, 261 f., 270, 300, 
322, 334 f., 341, 343, 347 ; coast 
of, 198, 233, 258, 333, 358 ; North- 
em, 347 

Syro-Arabian desert, 7 

Syro - Cappadocian cylinder - seals 
343 f. ; pottery, 343 

Tablets, 3, 28. 37, 309 ; from Telle, 
20, 171, 219, 254, 250 f., 293 

Taklamakan Desert, 351 f. 

Tarim basin, 351 

Taurus, 11, 86, 244, 347 

Tax-gatherers, 180 

Taylor, Col. J. E., 6, 17, 30, 34 ff., 

Tell, of the Tablets, 20; "de la 
IMaison des Fruits," 20 

Tell Ibrahim, site of Cutha, 8 f., 
37 J. 

Tell 'Id, 23 

Tell Lahm, 36 

Tell Manjiir, 39 

Tell Medina, 34 

Tell Sifr, 34, 73, 314, 317 f. 

Tello, site of Lagash, 17 ; excava- 
tions at, 17 ff. ; plan of, 19 ; re- 
mains of buildings at, 89 ff. ; 
objects from, 20, 41 f., 44 f., 47 ff., 
73. 171, 204, 219, 254, 266 f., 293, 
299, 342, 344 

Temple-accounts, 293 

Temple-towers, 53 f. 

Temples, early Sumerian, 89 ; build- 
ings attached to, 90 fl., 268 ; en- 
closure of a, 265 

Temti-agun, sukkal of Susa, 307 

Temti-khalki, sukkal of Elam, 306 f. 

Tepe Mussian ; see Mussiau 

Terra-cotta, stamped figures of, 75 f. 

Testing-house, for weights, 294 f. 

Theft, laws against, 182 

Thessaly, 341 

Thinis, 324 

This, 324 

Thompson, R. Campbell, 38 

Thompson, M. S., 341 

Throwing-stick, 79 

Thumb-marks, on bricks, 26, 91, 94 

Thureau-Dangin, F., researches ofi 
54, 67, 266 ; referred to, 9. 12, 14, 



18, 39. 52. 68, 61. 63, 65, 95 f., 
98. 101. 103 If., 109, I'JO, 158, 
162 f . , lt)5. 169 If., 178, 188, 193, 
203 f, 219, 222, 225, 232. 237, 
240 f., 246 f., 254 f.. 259, 274 ff., 
280. 285. 287, 290, 298, 300 f., 306, 
317 ff., 335 

Tidami, 261, 300 

Tidnu, 300 

Tig-abba, 291 

Tigris, 6 ; changes in channel of, 8 ; 
contrasted with Euphrates, 11 f. ; 
period of high water in, 11.; upper 
reaches of, 246 

Timat-Enlil, 301 

Time-reckoning, 295 ; see also Dating 

Tin, as an alloy, 73 

Tirish, 109, 185, 189 

Tithes, 180 

Toscanne, P., 266 

Trade-routes, 322 

Transcaspia, 341, 356 

Treaties, 101, 126 

Tribxitc, in grain, 127 

Tukin-khatti-migrisha, 209 

Tupliash ; see Aslmunnak 

Turkestan, 1, 332, 341, 351 S. 

Tutu, 246 

Tuz-Khurmati, 287 

Ubara, 296 

Ubil-Ishtar, au Akkadian prince, 

Ug-edin Canal, 154 

Ug-me, patesi of Lagash, 254 ; in 
chronological table, 361 

Ugigga, battle of, 159 

Ukush, patesi of Unmia, 188, 194 f. ; 
in chronological table, 360 

Ullu, 290 

Umanu, 261 

Umma, site of, 9, 11, 13. 21 f., read- 
ing of name of. 21 ; history of, 
90 f., 100 f., 120 ff., 144 f., 152. 
158 ff., 186 ff., 195, 238, 258, 298 ; 
destruction of, 31 f. ; see also 

Underworld, 149 

Ungnad, Prof. A., 14, 52 f., 03, 162, 
306 f., 313, 317 

Upper Egypt, 323 ff. 

Upper Sea, the Mediterranean, 194, 
197, 2G2 

Ur, site of, 9 f., 13, 34 ; excavations 
at, 34 f. ; as cult-centre, 35, 84 f. ; 
earlier history of, 147, 152, 195 f., 
199 f., 238. 263 ; Dynasty of, 64, 
253, 256, 276 f., 278 ff. ; Sumerian 
reaction under kings of. 48, 238, 
283 f. ; deification of kings of, 251, 

274, 288, 298 f. ; downfall ..f tl.o 
Dyna-ty of, .'iiHI if. ; later history 
of, 309 ff, 313, 317 L; $ee also 

Ur-abba, patesi of Lagash, 275 ff., 
281 ; in chronological tabic, 362 

Ur-Babbar, patesi of Laijash, 254 ; 
in chronological tal)le, 361 

Ur-baga, 284 

Ur-Bau, patesi of Lagash, 19, 70, 90 f., 
254 f., 258 f.,351; in chronological 
table, 361 

Ur-Bau, sou of Bar-Sin I., 297 

Ur-Dunpae, 301 

Ur-E, patesi of Lagash, 254 f. ; in 
clironological table, 361 

Ur-Engur, king of Ur, 64, 253, 276 ; 
reign of, 278 ff. ; buildings of, 
219, 280 f. ; architectural de- 
velopment under, 263 f. ; deifi- 
cation of, 274 ; in chronological 
table, 362 

Ur-Enlil, i^atesi of Nippur, 98 

Ur-gar, patesi of Lagash, 255, 258 ; 
in chronological table, 361 

Ur-gigir, patesi of Adamdun, 292 

Ur-ilim, patesi of Susa, 231 

Ur-Khumma, possible reading of the 
name Crlumma, 158 

Ur-Lama I. , patesi of Lagash. 296 ; 
cult of, 274, 299 ; in chronological 
table, 362 

LVLama XL, pateai of Lagash, 296, 
301 ; in chronological table, 362 

Ur-mama. patesi of Lagash, 254 ; in 
chronological table, 361 

Ur-nabbad, patesi of Nippur, 294 

L^r-nesu, patesi of Umma, 295 ; in 
chronological table, 362 

Ur-Nina, king of Lagash, reign of, 
106 ff. ; date of, 65 ; store-house 
of, 20, 90 ff. ; bas-reliefs of, 41, 
98, 110 ff. ; of dynasty of, 
168 f. ; offerings to statue of, 169, 
273 ; in chronological table, 360 

Ur-Ningirsu, patesi of Lagash, reign 
of, 274 ff. ; his relations to the 
Dynasty of Ur, 64, 256 ; engraved 
sliell of, 81 ; in chronological table, 

Ur-Xingirsu, priest of Nin&. pr<i- 
bably to be identified with the 
patesi, 255, 274 ff. 

TJr-Ningislizida, patesi of Ashnun- 
nak, 306 

Ur-Ninib, king of Isin, 309 ff. , in 
chronological table, 3ti2 

Ur-Ninpa, 95 

Ur-Ninsun, patesi of hn's^ish, 265 ; 
in chronological table, 361 




Ur-Pasag, patesi of Dungi-Babbar, 

Ura-imitti, king of Isin, 312 ; in 
clironological table, 362 

Urbillu, 287 f., 299, 301 f. 

Uri-zi, 109, 255, 268 

Urkarinnu-wood, 261 

Urkium, patesi of Susa, 291, 305 

Urlumma, patesi of Umnia, 158 ff, 
160 ff. ; in chronologica) table, 360 

Uniii, Lake, 197 

Urnuntaca, 185 

Urri, 290 

Ursu, 261 

Urtar, 170 

Urn, a division of Lagash, 108, 259 

Uru-azagga, a division of Lagasli, 
108 ; temples in, 259, 264 ; forti- 
fication of, 153 

Urukagina, king of La'jjash, reign 
of, 176 ff. ; date of, 65, 209 f. ; 
reforms of, 177 ff., 348; buildings 
of, 185 ff. ; famUy of, 170 f., 176, 
184 ; fate of, 193 ; predecessors 
of, 169 ff. ; records from inscribed 
plaque of, 158 f., 178, 186; in 
chronological table, 360 

Urukagina, son of Engilsa, 176, 209 f . 

Urukagina, father of Abba-dugga, 313 

Urumush, or Riraush, king of Kisli, 
reign of, 203 ff. ; fate of, 205 f., 
240 ; period of, 53, 210 f . ; in 
chronological table, 360 

Urzage, king of Kish, 103 f. ; in 
chronological table, 360 

Ush, patesi of Umma, 122, 124, 126, 
158 f. ; in chronological table, 360 

Ushfl-wood, 261 

Ut-napishtim, 9 

Utug, patesi of Kish, 102 f. ; Ib 
chronological table, 360 

Uzargarshana, 301 

Van, Lake, 197 

Vases, votive, 193, 199 ff., 204; for 
libations, 76 f. ; for body-paint, 330 

Vegetable motives, on Elamite 
painted pottery, 341 

Visions ; see Dreams 

Vultures, Stele of the, description 
of, 129 ff. ; referred to, 42 f., 48, 
105, 117 f., 120 ff., 127, 136, 142, 
220, 228 f., 330 ff. ; origin of 
popular name of, 125 

Wace, a. J. B.,341 
Wadi Hammamat, 323 
Ward, W. Hayes, 66, 78 
Warka, site of Erech, 9 ; excavations 
at, 32 ft. ; plan of, 33 ; bricks 

from, 280 ; contracted burials at, 

Water, for libation, 198 

Wax writing-tablet, origin of, 346 

Weapons, 73 ; Sumerian, 50, 136 f., 
286 f. ; Semitic. 247, 286 

Weights, 294 f . 

Weissbach, Prof. F. H., 6, 38, 319 

Well, of Eannatum, 93, 155 

West, Sea of the, 234 ; Wall of the, 
300 ; extent of Babylonian in- 
fluence in the, 234 f., 343 ff. 

Western Asia, 3 ; early ceramics of, 

W^estern Semites, origin of the, 55 ; 
their destruction of Sumerian 
towns, 32 ; invasions of, 315 f. 

AVheat, cultivation of, 323, 357 ; 
original home of, 332 ; in earliest 
stratum at Anau, 332 

Wigs, Sumerian, 43, 46, 138 

Wine, fees of, 181 f. 

Winckler, Prof. Hugo, 14, 61, 103, 
219, 235, 275, 317, 344 f. 

W' ind-erosion, effects of, 353 

W'izards, 267 
"AVomen, position and rights of, 116, 
184, 286 ; clothing of, 42 ; Su- 
merian statuettes of, 71 f. 

Woolley, C. L., 327 

Worship, scenes of, 44 

Writing, invention of cuneiform, 3, 
329 f., 347 ; Elamite forms of, 
337 ff. ; origin of Egyptian system 
of, 325, 328 f. ; Hittite, 339 ; Mi- 
noan, 345 

Wuswas, 33 

Yakut, 8 
Yotkan, 353, 357 
Yurung-kash, 354 

Zab, Lower, 232 

Zabalu-wood, 261 

Zabshali, 299 

Zagros mountains, 55, 302 ; pass, 250 

Zakhara, 225 f. 

Zakro, sealings from, 346 

Zamama, 103 ; temple of, 39 

Zambia, king of Isin, 313 ; in chrono- 
logical table, 362 

Zarik, patesi of Susa, 291, 305 

Zarzari, 185 

Zaula, 290 

Ziggurat, institution of the, 53 f. ; 
at Nippur, 89 ; of Gudea, 264 f. 

Zimanak, Field of, 206 

Zimmem, Prof. Heinrich, 64 f. 

Zuzu, king of Opis, 146 ; in chrono- 
logical table, 360 





I ^ ■^^ ^^ 


University of Toronto 

Acme Library Card Pocket