Skip to main content

Full text of "Publications"

See other formats 


UNIVERSITY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 
THE  UNIVERSITY  MUSEUM 

PUBLICATIONS   OF  THE   BABYLONIAN   SECTION 
VOL.  IV  No.  1 


HISTORICAL   TEXTS 

BY 

ARNO  POEBEL 


PHILADELPHIA 

PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  MUSEUM 
1914 


FOREWORD 

In  the  spring  of  1912,  Dr.  Poebel  was  granted  permission 
to  study  the  historical  and  grammatical  texts  in  the  Baby- 
lonian collections  in  the  University  Museum,  and  was  employed 
by  the  Museum  during  the  summer  of  1913  and  during  the 
winter  of  1913-14  for  the  purpose  of  continuing  these  studies. 
During  these  two  periods,  Dr.  Poebel  was  chiefly  engaged  in 
copying  historical  and  grammatical  texts  selected  from  a  large 
number  of  tablets  of  all  classes.  It  was  Dr.  Poebel's  plan  to 
publish  simultaneously  with  his  copies,  complete  translations  of 
all  of  these  texts.  It  was  also  a  part  of  his  plan  to  reconstruct, 
on  the  basis  of  the  historical  tablets,  portions  of  the  early  his- 
tory of  Babylonia.  Another  task  to  which  he  set  himself  at 
the  same  time  was  the  preparation  of  a  treatise  on  Sumerian 
grammar  based  upon  the  grammatical  tablets  in  the  Museum's 
collection. 

Neither  of  these  tasks  had  been  completed  at  the  time 
when  Dr.  Poebel's  duties  called  him  back  to  Germany  in  March, 
1914.  It  was  decided,  however,  to  publish  that  portion  of  the 
work  which  had  been  completed  and  to  bring  out  the  remainder 
at  a  later  date.  This  volume  contains  that  portion  of  the  pro- 
jected historical  studies  which  was  completed  in  March. 

Dr.  Poebel  had  just  corrected  and  returned  the  galley 
proofs  at  the  time  when  communication  with  Germany  was 

(3) 


4  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

interrupted  by  the  war.  In  justice  to  Dr.  Poebel,  it  should 
be  stated  that  he  had  no  opportunity  of  reading  the  final 
proofs  as  he  expected  to  do. 

Dr.  Poebel's  autograph  copies  of  all  the  historical  texts 
included  in  this  volume  and  many  more  of  which  trans- 
lations and  commentaries  have  not  been  finished,  will  be  found 
in  Volume  V  of  this  series. 

G.  B.  GORDON. 


CONTENTS 

PACE 

1.     A   NEW   CREATION   AND    DELUGE   TEXT...  7 

I  NTRODUCTION 9 

TRANSCRIPTION 13 

TRANSLATION 17 

COMMENTARY 21 

II.     NEW   LISTS  OF    KINGS 71 

TRANSCRIPTIONS  AND  TRANSLATIONS 73 

RECONSTRUCTION  OF  THE  CHRONOLOGICAL  SYSTEM 

OF  THE  BABYLONIANS 85 

ANNOTATIONS  TO  THE  KING  LISTS 97 

ANNOTATIONS  TO  THE  KINGS no 

III.  A    HISTORY    OF   THE   TUMMAL   OF   NINLIL 

AT   NIPPUR.. 141 

TRANSLITERATION 143 

TRANSLATION 145 

IV.  TRANSCRIPTION   OF   EN-SAKUS-ANNA 149 

V.     THE   EVENTS  OF   EANNADU'S   REIGN 157 

VI.     INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS   OF   AGADE 171 

TRANSCRIPTION  AND  TRANSLATION 173 

THE  BEARING  OF  THE  NEW  INSCRIPTIONS  ON  THE 

HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGS  OF  AGADE 217 

(5) 


I 

A  NEW  CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT 


VOL.  IV. 


A  NEW  CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT 

INTRODUCTION 

The  tablet  published  as  No.  i  of  the  present  volume  contains 
a  Sumerian  account  of  the  creation,  the  founding  of  prediluvian 
cities  and  the  deluge.  I  found  this  tablet  in  the  summer  of  1912 
in  several  fragments  among  the  tablets  which  had  been  numbered 
and  catalogued  by  the  former  curator  of  the  Babylonian  section 
of  the  Museum,  Prof.  H.  V.  Hilprecht.1  According  to  the 
catalogue  it  was  dug  from  the  soil  of  Nippur  during  the  third 
Babylonian  expedition  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

The  tablet,  as  published  here,  represents  only  the  lower 
portion  of  the  original.  This  measured  about  7  inches  or  17.8 
centimeters  in  length  and  5!  inches  or  14.3  centimeters  in  width 
and  its  inscribed  surface  was  about  three  times  that  of  the 
present  fragments.  There  is,  however,  some  hope  that  at 
least  some  of  the  missing  fragments  will  be  found  either  in  the 
University  Museum  at  Philadelphia  or  in  the  Museum  at 
Constantinople,  since  the  breaks  on  the  upper  side  of  the 
recovered  portion  are  very  sharp,  a  fact  which  seems  to  indi- 
cate that  the  missing  portions  were  broken  off  only  after  the 
tablet  was  dug  from  the  soil. 

As  regards  the  contents  of  our  tablet,  this  will  best  be 
seen  from  the  transcription  and  translation  of  the  text  itself. 
A  brief  synopsis,  however,  may  perhaps  be  found  useful  by 
those  who  do  not  care  to  read  the  technical  remarks  in  the  last 
section  of  this  chapter,  or  who  are  not  so  thoroughly  accustomed 

1  The  box  in  which  the  main  fragment  of  the  tablet  was  preserved  is  labeled:  Incantation, 
10673,  N>-  19-12-04.  According  to  this  the  tablet  was  entered  in  the  catalogue  on  December 
19,  1904.  The  catalogue  contains  the  following  entry:  10673  |  H.  V.  H.  |  19-12-04  |  Ni.  —  | 
fragment  of  baked  clay  |  III.  Exp.  |  Box  13.  In  a  search  for  the  missing  portions  of  the 
tablet,  I  found  two  small  fragments  which  proved  to  belong  to  the  tablet  and  were  accordingly 
joined  on.  These  had  been  catalogued,  together  with  a  third  piece  which  did  not  belong 
to  this  tablet,  under  the  number  10562. 

(9) 


10  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

to  the  quaint  peculiarities  and  especially  to  the  abrupt  style  of 
ancient  poetry — for  our  text  is  a  poem  as  may  be  seen  from  the 
mere  external  appearance  of  the  tablet,  namely,  the  arrangement 
of  the  lines  and  the  frequent  blank  spaces  between  the  various 
groups  of  signs  due  to  the  rhythmical  character  of  the  text. 
Readers  of  the  Bible,  moreover,  will  easily  recognize  the  quaint 
principle  of  partial  repetition  or  paraphrase  in  parallel  lines, 
which  is  so  characteristic  a  feature  of  Hebrew  poetry. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  preserved  portion  of  the  first 
column  we  find  the  goddess  Nintu(r)  or  Nin-harsagga  speak- 
ing of  the  destruction  of  mankind  which  she  calls  hers,  because 
she  was  one  of  its  creators  as  we  shall  presently  see.  It  is 
not  clear,  however,  whether  in  this  passage  she  promises  to 
protect  human  kind  from  destruction  or  whether  she  declares 
her  intention  to  destroy  human  kind.  In  the  annotations  at. 
the  end  of  this  chapter  it  will  be  shown  how  the  answer  to  this 
question  would  definitely  establish  the  relation  between  the 
first  two  columns  of  our  tablet  and  the  rest  of  the  text,  the 
point  at  issue  being  whether  the  former  represent  an  independent 
account  of  the  creation  or  simply  a  retrospective  description 
of  the  origin  of  what  was  to  perish  in  the  flood,  namely,  all 
living  beings  and  the  cities  which  man  had  built.  Unfortunately 
it  will  be  impossible  to  give  a  definite  answer  to  this  important 
question  as  long  as  the  upper  portion  of  the  tablet  is  missing. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  in  1.  1 1  we  read  that  the  creating  deity 
fixes  the  commandments  concerning  man,  i.  e.,  defines  his 
duties  and  his  rights,  one  of  which  is,  e.  g.,  the  building  of  cities 
and  temples  in  a  "clean  spot,"  i.  e.,  in  hallowed  places. 

The  last  lines  of  the  first  column  refer  to  the  creation  of 
the  animals  which  by  this  passage  are  shown  to  have  been 
created  after  man  just  as  in  the  second  Biblical  account  of  the 
creation  in  Genesis  2.  The  introductory  lines  13  and  14,  which 
form  the  transition  from  the  account  of  the  creation  of  man  to 
that  of  the  animals,  fortunately  give  us  the  names  of  the  four 
creators  of  mankind,  namely,  An,  Enlil,  Enki  and  the  goddess 
Nin-harsagga,  the  four  highest  deities  of  the  Babylonian 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  11 

pantheon.  It  has  hitherto  been  almost  completely  overlooked 
what  an  important  part  the  last  named  deity  played  in  the 
earlier  Babylonian  period,  especially  in  the  southern  section 
of  the  country;  our  passage,  therefore,  furnishes  us  a  most 
welcome  clue  concerning  the  position  of  this  deity.  One  of  the 
sacred  cities  of  this  goddess,  the  city  of  Adab,  has  been  made 
known  to  us  by  the  excavations  of  the  University  of  Chicago. 

In  the  preserved  portion  of  the  second  column  we  read  of 
five  prediluvian  cities  of  Babylonia,  which  were  founded  and 
bestowed  upon  various  deities  evidently  by  the  most  powerful 
of  the  gods,  namely,  Enlil,  the  lord  of  all  the  lands.  As  the 
first  of  these  cities,  Eridu,  is  given  to  Enki,  the  lord  of  the 
ocean,  who  is  the  third  of  the  gods  in  rank,  it  is  evident  that 
the  now  missing  upper  portion  reported  the  founding  of  the 
sacred  cities  of  the  two  highest  gods,  namely,  Uruk,  the  city  of 
An,  god  of  Heaven,  and  Nippur,  the  city  of  Enlil  himself,  which 
has  been  partially  excavated  by  the  University  of  Pennsylvania, 
and  where  our  own  tablet  was  dug  from  the  soil.  In  one  of  the 
two  cities,  moreover,  one  of  the  created  men  must  have  been 
established  as  the  first  king  of  Babylonia,  but  in  our  text  we 
have  preserved  only  an  allusion  to  the  creation  of  the  insignia 
of  this  king  in  the  broken  lines  at  the  beginning  of  Column  2. 

The  last  lines  of  the  column  are  not  clear  to  me;  possibly 
they  treat  of  the  creation  of  canals,  etc.,  the  water  of  which  was 
indispensable  for  the  existence  of  the  Babylonian  cities;  for 
without  it  the  land  would  turn  into  a  sandy  desert  as  indeed 
it  has  in  many  places  at  the  present  day. 

In  the  third  column  of  our  fragment  we  are  already  in  the 
story  of  the  flood.  The  gods  have  resolved  to  destroy  man- 
kind, but  when  it  comes  to  the  execution  of  the  decision,  the 
gods,  and  especially  the  goddesses  Innanna  and  Nintu,  are  filled 
with  terror  and  the  latter  with  repentance  for  the  great  calamity 
which  they  have  caused.  But  it  is  only  Enki,  the  god  of  wisdom, 
who  is  able  to  devise  a  plan  to  save  at  least  one  of  the  doomed 
race,  Z'mgiddu,  the  tenth  and  last  of  the  prediluvian  kings,  who 
like  Noah  in  the  Bible  was  a  pious  man;  in  Column  4  we  there- 


12  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BAB.YLONIAN    SECTION 

fore  read  that  Enki  informs  Ziugiddu  of  the  resolution  of  the 
gods,  and  the  missing  part  of  the  same  column  must  have 
reported  how  Ziugiddu  built  his  boat  and  placed  in  it  his  family 
and  all  kinds  of  artisans  as  well  as  all  sorts  of  animals. 

In  the  fifth  column  the  deluge  itself  is  recounted.  In 
accordance  with  the  older  Biblical  account  it  is  caused  only 
by  a  strong  rain  or,  in  the  Babylonian  expression,  the  rain 
demon,  not  as  in  the  later  Biblical  account  also  by  the  waters 
from  underneath  the  earth.  The  duration  of  the  rain  is  seven 
days  and  seven  nights;  in  this  our  tablet  differs  from  the  pre- 
viously known  Babylonian  account  which  gives  it  as  six  days 
only;  nevertheless,  in  this  point  our  text  stands  much  nearer 
to  this  other  Babylonian  account  than  to  either  Biblical  tradi- 
tion, the  older  of  which  makes  the  rain  last  forty  days  and 
nights,  while  according  to  the  later  tradition  the  flood  continued 
to  rise  for  five  months. 

After  the  rain  has  ceased,  the  sun-god  appears  from  behind 
the  clouds  and  is  the  first  to  observe  Ziugiddu  in  his  boat  which 
is  floating  on  the  waters.  Our  hero  prostrates  himself  before 
the  god  and  by  offering  up  sacrifices  evidently  wins  his  favor. 
In  the  sixth  and  last  column,  after  an  obscure  passage,  he 
prostrates  himself  before  Enlil  who  had  been  chiefly  responsible 
for  the  resolution  of  the  gods  to  destroy  mankind.  But  he  too 
is  now  appeased  and  shows  his  favor  by  making  Ziugiddu  a 
god.  In  the  last  of  the  preserved  lines  the  gods  take  Ziugiddu 
to  a  distant  land,  probably  the  country  of  Dilmun  somewhere 
on  the  shore  of  the  Persian  gulf,  where  he  lives  thenceforth  as 
a  god. 


A.    POEBEL  —  CREATION    AND    DELUGE   T-EXT  13 

TRANSCRIPTION 
COLUMN   i 

The  upper  part  of  the  column,  about  three-fourths  of  the  text,  is  missing. 


[  ..................  ]  IM 

nam-lu-qal-mu     ha-lam-ma-bi-a     ga-ba-n[i-  .............  ] 

flnin-tu-ra     nig-dim-dim-rna-rnu     si-[  ..........  ] 

ga-ba-ni-ib-gi-gi 

5'  uku     ki-ur-bi-ta     ga-ba-ni-ib-gur-ru-NE 
uru     ki-me-a-bi     he-im-mi-in-du 

gis-ge-bi     ni-ga-ba-ab-dub-bu 
e^me-a     sig-bi     ki-azag-ga     he-im-mi-in-sub(u) 
ki-es-me-a     ki-azag-ga     he-im-mi-ni-ib-ri 
iof  azag-a-NIG-NE-te(me)-na     si-mi-ni-in-si-sa 
garza-me-mah     su-mi-ni-ib-su-du 
ki-a-  im-ma-ab-KA     Dl-ga-  mu-ni-in-ga 
an     den-lil     den-ki     dnin-har-sag-ga-ge 
sag-ge-ga     mu-un-dim-es-a-ba 
1  5'  nig-x2-ki-ta     ki-ta     mu-dib-dib 

MAS-ANSU     nig-ur-limmu3-edin-na 
me-te-a-as     bi-ib-gal 

COLUMN  2 
The  upper  part  of  the  column,  about  three-fifths  of  the  text,  is  missing. 


]-ri [ ]     ga-ba-ni-in-[ ] 

].  .  .  .-b[i]         igi-ga-ba-ni-ib-du-[ - ] 

]..  -dim-kalam-ma-ge    us-gi[- .  .  . -g]i- .  .  ] .  .  -ab-ba?-[ . . . ] 


1  Not  quite  certain. 

2  Perhaps  zi  +  zi,  gi  +  gi,  etc. 

3  Perhaps  to  be  read  tab-tab. 


14  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

[ ].  .-nam-lugal-la        an-ta-e-[.  .  .-]a-ba 

10' [.  .].  .-mah     gis-g[u]?-[z]a?     nam-lugal-la     an-ta-e-a-ba 

[garza-me-m]ah  [ s]u-mi-ni-ib-su-du 

[ .  .]-ga     u[ru?-.  .  .  .     b]a?-an-da-sub 

mu-bi     ba-an-s[a-a     ka]b-dQ-g[a]     [b]a-[ha]l-[ha]l-la 

uru-bi-e-ne     eridukl     mas-sag    dnu-dim-mut 

15'  mi-ni-in-si 

2-kam-ma     TtKnu-gi-ra     bad-NAGAR+DlSki2   mi-ni-in-si 
3-kam-ma     la-ra-ak    dpa-bil-har-sag   mi-ni-in-si 
4-kam-ma     zimbirkl     sul     dutu     mi-ni-in-si 
5-kam-ma     surubba(k)kl    dSU-KUR-RU-ra     mi-ni-in-si 
20'  uru-bi-e-ne     mu-bi     ba-an-sa-a 

kab-dQ-ga     ba-hal-hal-la 
a-gi-  DAR-  ma-  an(?)-SO(?)3  A-AN3-  im-ma-al-la-  a-  im-ma-an- 

DU 
i-tur-tur-ri     su-luh-  BI-GAR.  HAR-HAR     mi-ni-ib-ga-ga 


COLUMN  3 
The  beginning  of  the  column,  about  two-thirds  of  the  text,  is  missing. 

i  o'  ki- .  .  .  .     an-na?- .  .  [ ] 

uk[u ] 

a-ma-ru[ ] 


.  .  .-ne-ne     in-(s)a[-es?4     ] 

1 5'  u-bi-a    dnin-t[u     ]dim     a-[ ] 

azagdinnanna-ge    uku-bi-su     a-nir     mu-[ ] 

den-ki     sa-ni-te-na-ge     a-i-ni- ..[...  -gi-gi .  .  .  ] 

an    den-lil    den-ki    dnin-har-sag-ga-g[e     ] 

dingir-an-ki-ge     mu-an-den-lil     mu-n[i- 

20'  u-ba     zi-u-GID-du     lugal-am     pasis  [ ] 


1  Perhaps  intended  for  2-kam-ma-su? 

2  Seems  to  be  the  sign  REG  308. 

3  Perhaps  a!-ti(?)? 

4  Perhaps  har-dim  bi-in-(s)a  ....  "thus  they  (he)  . . .  ." 


A.  POEBEL  —  CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  15 

AN-SAG-gur-gur    mu-un-dim-dirn     en[  ...........  ] 

nam-BUR-na     KA-si-si-gi     m-te-ga[  ..........  ] 

u-su-us-e        sag-us-gub-ba[  .............  ] 

ma-mu-nu-me-a     e-de     KA-bal[  ...........  j 

mu-an-ki-bi-ta     pa-pa-de[  .............  ] 

COLUMN  4 

[..].-...  -Si1  dingir-ri-e-ne    GlS-Sl[G2  ........  j 

zi-u-GID-du-da.bi(?).gub-ba     gis-mu-.  .[  .........  ] 

iz-zi-da     a-gub-bu-mu     gub-ba[  ............  ] 

iz-zi-da     i(nim)-ga-ra-ab-dG-du  [  ............  ] 

na-ri-ga-mu     gis-TU-P[I  ..............  ]  .  .  .  .  ] 

su?-me-a     a-ma-ru     u-dil3  kab-d[u-ga  ........  ] 


numun-nam-lu-qal     ha-lam-e-d[e  ...........  ] 

di-til-la     if(nim)-bu-uh-ru-[um-dingir-ri-e-ne-ka  ......  ] 

i  o  du-du-ga     an     den[-lil  ...................  ] 

[n]am-lugal-bi     bal-bi     .  .  .  [  ................  ] 

e?-[n]e-su     ....[  ................  ] 

[  .....  ]-na     mu-.  .  .  [  ................  ] 

The  rest  of  the  column,  about  three-fourths  of  the  text,  is  missing. 

COLUMN  5 

im-hul-im-hul-ni-gur-gur-gal     du-a-bi     ur-bi     ni-lah-gi-es 
a-ma-ru     u-du^  kab-dfl-ga     ba-an-da-ab-ur-ur 
u-y-am         ge-y-am 
a-ma-ru     kalam-ma     ba-ur-ra-ta 
5   glsma-gur-gur     a-gal-la     im-hul-bul-bul-a-ta 
dutu     i-im-ma-ra-e     an-ki-a     u-ma-ma 


1  Perhaps  ki-ur-sii? 

2  Probably  engar  =  igarum  "wall." 

3  Perhaps  0+KA(  =  ugu  or  muh). 

4  See  note  to  4s. 


16  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

zi-u-GID-du    g"ma-gur-gur     KA(?)-BUR     mu-un-da-BUR 
sul-dutu      gis-sir-ni?  .  sa?  •  gi"ma-gur-gur-su      ba-an-tu-ri-en 
zi-u-G  I  D-du     lugal-am 
10  igi-dutu-su     KA-ki-su-ub-ba-tum 

lugal-e    gu     im-ma-ab-gaz-e    u[d]u     im-ma-ab-sar-ri 

[ ]...  si-gal  [ ]....-la-da- 

.  .  .]  mu-un-[n]a- [ ]•-•[••] 


15    [ ]  bi-in-si 

[ ]..  tab-ba 

[ ]a-[b]a 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 

COLUMN  6 

zi-an-na     zi-ki-a     ni-pa-de-en-ze-en 

za-zu-da     he-im-da-la 
an-den-lil     zi-an-na     zi-ki-a     ni-pa-de(-en)-ze-en 

za-da-ne-ne     im-da-la 
5   nig-x(-ma)1ki-ta2  e-de     im-ma-ra-e-de 
zi-u-GID-du     lugal-am 
igi-an-den-lil-la-su     KA-ki-su-ub-ba-tum 
ti     dingir-dim     mu-un-na-si-mu 
zi-da-rf    dingir-dim     mu-un-na-ab-e-de 
10  u-ba     zi-u-GID-du     lugal-am 

mu     nig-x-ma     numun-nam-lu-qal-URU?-a 

kur-bal     kur-dilmun?-na     ki- -su     mu-un-ti-es 

za- [ ]     gal-?bi?  ti?-es-a? 

The  rest  of  the  column,  about  three-fourths  of  the  text,  is  missing. 

LEFT  EDGE 
.-ra?     zi-u-GID-du     SAL+ .          .[. 


1  Erased? 

2  Written  over  an  erased  da? 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  17 

TRANSLATION 

COLUMN   i 


"My  human-kind  on  its  destruction  I  will  (let  us) 

"My,  Nintu's,  creations 

I  will  (let  us) 

5'  "The  people  in  their  settlements  1  will  (let  us) 

"Cities he  may  build, 

their  shade  (protection)  I  will  (let  us) 

"The  brick  of  our  houses  may  he  cast  in  a  clean  spot, 

"Our places  may  he  establish  in  a  clean  spot." 

10' of  the  temennu  she  made  straight 

for  it, 
The  sublime  commandments  and  precepts  she  made  perfect 

for  it, 

After  An,  Enlil,  Enki  and  Nin-harsagga 
Had  created  the  blackheaded, 

The of  the  ground  the  ground , 

15'  The  animals,  the  four  legged,  of  the  field  artfully  they  called 

into  existence. 

COLUMN  2 
5'  " 


I  will  (let  us) upon  him 

" I  will  (let  us)  look  upon  bim." 

After  the  maker  of  the    of  the  land,  the  establisher 

of  the  foundations  of  the 

Had  created  the of  royalty, 

10'  Created  the  sublime ,  the of  royalty. 

The  sublime  commandments  and  precepts  he  made  perfect 
for  it. 


18  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

In  clean  places  five  cities  he  founded, 

(And)  after  their  names    he    had  called,    (and)    they  had 
been  allotted  to  kabdu(ga)s 

-The of  these  cities,  Eridu,  to  the  leader  Nudimmut 

15'  he  gave, 

Secondly,  to Bad-NAGAR+  DlS     he  gave, 

Thirdly,  Larak  to  Pabilharsag  he  gave, 
Fourthly,  Sippar  to  the  hero  Samas  he  gave, 

Fifthly,  Suruppak  to he  gave — ; 

20'  After  the  names  of  these  cities  he  had   called,   (and)     to 
kabdu(ga)s  they  had  been  allotted, 

The he , he , 

small  rivers  and  suluhs he  established .  .  . 


COLUMN  3 


10'  The place 

The  people . 

A  rainstorm  . 


Their they  made, 

i  5'  At  that  time  Nintu  screamed  like  a  woman  in  travail 

The  holy  I  star  wailed  on  account  of  her  people. 

Enki  in  his  own  heart  held  counsel. 

Anu,  Enlil,  Enki  and  Nin-harsagga 

The  gods  of  Heaven  and  Earth  invoked  the  name  of  Anu 

(and)  Enlil. 
20'  At  that  time  Ziugiddu  was  king,  the  pasisu  of 

A  huge he  made, 

In  humility  prostrating  himself,  in  reverence , 

Daily  and  perseveringly  standing  in  attendance , 

ing  by  dreams  which  had  not  been  (before), , 

25'  Conjurmg  by  the  name  of  Heaven  and  Earth 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  19 

COLUMN  4 

For the  gods  a  wall 

Ziugiddu  standing  at  i/s(?)  side  heard 

"At  the  wall  at  my  left  side  stand  and 

"At  the  wall  I  will  speak  a  word  to  thee. 
5    "O  my  holy  one,  thy  ear  open  to  me 

"By  our  hand(?)  a  rainstorm 

will  be  sent; 

"To  destroy  the  seed  of  mankind,  to , 

"Is  the  decision,  the  saying  of  the  assembly  of  the  gods, 

10   "The  commands  of  Anu  (and)  Enlil , 

"Its  (their)  kingdom,  its  (their)  rule , 

"To  him  . 


COLUMN  5 

All    the   windstorms   which   possess   immense   power,    they 

all  (and)  together  came, 

The  rainstorm raged  with  them. 

When  for  seven  days,  for  seven  nights 
The  rainstorm  in  the  land  had  raged, 
5   The  huge  boat  on  the  great  waters  by  the  windstorms  had 

been  carried  away, 
Samas  came  forth  (again),  shedding  light  over  Heaven  and 

Earth. 

Ziugiddu  opened  a of  the  huge  boat, 

The  light  of  the  hero  Samas  he  lets  (thou  lettest)  enter  into 

the  interior?  of  the  huge  boat. 
Ziugiddu,  the  king, 
10   Before  Samas  he  prostrates  himself, 

The  king,  an  ox  he  sacrifices,  a  sheep  he  slaughters. 

While great  horn? 

.  he  .        .  for  him 


20  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

15 he  filled 

two  .  .  . 

After .  . 


COLUMN  6 

"By  the  soul  of  Heaven,  by  the  soul  of  the  earth,  ye  shall 
conjure  him, 

that  he  may with  you. 

"Anu  (and]  Enlil  by  the  soul  of  Heaven  and  by  the  soul  of 
the  earth  ye  shall  conjure, 

and  he  will with  you." 

5   The  '....' of  the  ground  (with  the  earth),  rising  it  rises. 

Ziugiddu,  the  king, 

Before  Anu  (and)  Enlil  he  prostrates  himself. 
Life  like  (that  of)  a  god  he  gives  (/  give  ?)  to  him, 
An  eternal  soul  like  (that  of)  a  god  he  creates  for  him. 
10  At  that  time  Ziugiddu,  the  king, 

The  name  of  the "Preserver  of  the  seed  of  man- 
kind". .  .  . 

On  a mountain,  the  mountain  of  Dilmun 

they  caused  him  to  dwell 
After   they  had  caused  him  to  dwell, 


LEFT  EDGE 

Ziugiddu 


A.    POEBEL — CREATIC3N    AND   DELUGE   TEXT  21 


COLUMN   i 

The  preserved  portion  of  the  first  column  begins  with  the 
direct  speech  of  a  deity  referring  to  what  man  shall  do  and 
what  the  deity  or  all  the  gods  intend  to  do  with  regard  to  man 
whose  creation  must  have  been  reported  in  the  now  missing 
portion  of  the  first  column.  The  beginning  of  the  speech,  as 
well  as  the  lines  which  stated  who  the  speaker  is,  are  not  pre- 
served, but  as  the  expression  nam-lu-qal-mu,  "my  human- 
kind," 1.  2,  could  be  used  only  by  a  deity  who  had  some  special 
relation  to  mankind,  and  as'  in  the  following  line  the  possessive 
pronoun  of  the  first  person  is  anticipated  by  the  genitive  dnin- 
tu-ra,  "of  Nin-tu(r),"  it  seems  that  the  words  in  11.  I'-g'  are 
uttered  by  Nin-tu,  the  goddess,  who  is  usually  known  as 
Nin-harsag(ga),  Ninmah  or  Belit-ili,  who  according  to  1.  12  is 
one  of  the  creators  of  mankind  and  evidently  its  chief  creator. 
Note,  moreover,  that  in  the  passage  Gilg.  Ep.  XIi22.  m  the 
almost  identical  term  nisea,  "my  people,"  is  used  by  her,  and 
also  compare  the  annotations  to  2n. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  would  seem  that  the  highest  of  the 
gods,  Anu  or  Enlil,  or  the  Anu  Enlil,  would  be  likely  to  be 
credited  with  determining  the  duties  and  rights  of  man;  in  this 
case  dnin-tu-ra  might  easily  be  taken  as  a  dative  dependent  on 
ga-ba-ni-ib-gi-gi,  but  the  expressions  "my  human  kind"  and  "my 
works"  would  present  some  difficulty  if  they  have  to  be  referred 
to  Anu  or  Enlil;  and  as  we  shall  see  that  Nin-harsag  herself 
was,  in  the  oldest  period,  one  of  the  supreme  ruler-deities,  it 
should  not  surprise  us  that  we  find  her  here  in  the  role  of  Anu 
or  Enlil. 

For  the  allusion  to  the  destruction  of  mankind  in  nam- 
lu-qal-mu  ha-lam-ma-bi-a,  1.  2,  I  cannot  give  a  satisfactory 
explanation  at  the  present.  As  the  roots  of  the  verbal  forms 
in  11.  2  and  3  are  broken  off,  and  as  the  meaning  of  the  verbs 


22  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

in  the  immediately  following  lines  is  not  sufficiently  clear, 
we  cannot  even  say  whether  Nintu  according  to  this  passage 
wishes  to  have  the  human  race  destroyed  or  whether  she  promises 
to  guard  it  against  destruction.  In  the  former  case  we  should 
have  to  assume  a  situation  such  as  is  presupposed  in  the  lamen- 
tation of  Belit-ili  because  of  her  participation  in  the  plan  to 
destroy  the  human  race,  Gilg.  Ep.  XI 120-124;  we  should  then 
have  here  already  a  reference  to  the  cause  of  the  deluge  which 
forms  the  theme  of  the  last  four  columns  of  our  tablet;  but 
as  in  this  case  the  lower  part  of  Column  i  and  practically  the 
whole  of  Column  2  would  have  to  be  taken  as  a  kind  of  retro- 
spective sketch  inserted  into  the  main  stream  of  the  narrative, 
the  second  possibility,  namely,  that  Nintu  promises  to  guard 
her  creation  against  possible  extinction,  seems  to  me  by  far 
preferable.  A  definite  solution,  however,  will  be  possible  only 
through  the  recovery  of  the  parts  now  missing. 

On  the  supposition  that  11.  2,  3  and  4  are  parallel  lines, 
they  may  perhaps  be  reconstructed  as  follows: 

nam-lu-qal-mu     ha-lam-ma-bi-a     ga-ba-n[i-ib-gi-gi] 
dnin-tu-ra     nig-dim-dim-ma-mu     si-[ . .  . -bi-a] 
ga-ba-ni-ib-gf-gi. 

The  last  verbal  form  as  well  as  the  forms  ga-ba-ni-ib-gur-ru- 
de?,  1.  5',  and  m-ga-ba-ab-dub-bu,  1.  7,  seem  to  belong  to  the 
middle  theme  ga-bab-dim,  "let  me  make  for  myself,"  which, 
however,  in  the  idiom  of  our  text  appears  with  a  final  e  (gab- 
gurrud-e,  ni-gab-dubb-u)1.  Ha-lam-ma-bi-a  ga-ba-ni-ib-gf-gi 
therefore  might  perhaps  be  translated,  "I  shall  cause  them  to 
be ed  from  their  destruction." 

Ki-ur,  1.  5',  is  in  Semitic  durussu,  which  according  to 
5  R  4i5h  is  a  synonym  of  alu,  "city,"  and  according  to  2  R  3545 
a  synonym  of  isdu,  "foundation." 

The  meaning  of  ga-ba-ni-ib-gur-ru-Je  is  very  doubtful. 
Note  that  gur(rud)  as  well  as  gi-gi  have  the  meaning  of  "to 


1  See  U.M.B.S.,  Vol.  VI,  Grammatical  Texts. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  23 

turn.'  In  case  the  passage  should  refer  to  the  destruction  of 
mankind,  a  translation,  "The  land  in  its  foundations  let  us  over- 
throw," would  he  possible;  otherwise  the  meaning  of  the  passage 
must  be  something  like:  "The  people  in  their  settlements  let 
us  cause  to (for  us)." 

Uru-ki-me-a-bi,  1.  6,  presents  great  difficulties;  note  that 
we  have  here  me-a-bi,  while  the  following  lines  have  only 
me-a.  Possibly  me-a-bi  is  a  contraction  of  two  variants  me-a, 
"our,"  and  bi,  "their;"  in  this  case  URU  -  KI  might  have  to 
be  taken  as  uru'1  :  urukl-bi  he-im-mi-in-du,  "his  cities  may  he 
build."  However,  the  meaning  "our"  for  me-a  is  by  no  means 
certain,  and  ki-me-a-bi  may  be  a  formation  analogous  to  a-na-me- 
a-bi,  "whosoever,"  and  mean  "wherever  (he  has  built  a  city)." 
Cf.  also  Gudea,  Cyl.  A  I4,  uru-me-a  NIG-UL  PA-nam-e,  etc. 

The  subject  of  the  singular  he-im-mi-in-du  is  "man"  in 
a  collective  sense. 

Ni-ga-ba-ab-dub-bu  perhaps  =  "I  will  (or  let  us)  cause 
them  to  rest  in  it  (or  upon  it,  upon  them)."  Cf.  ni-dub(-dub) 
=  pasahu,  "to  rest,"  nahu,  "to  rest,"  but  also  kuppuru?, 
kubburu,  etc.  =  destroy? 

Is  ki-es,  1.  9,  perhaps  a  different  writing  for  keskl,  the 
sanctuary  of  Belit-ili? 

With  1.  10  the  direct  speech,  in  which  the  deity  explains 
her  intention  with  regard  to  mankind  seems  to  be  at  an  end, 
the  following  lines  probably  relating  in  the  third  person  that 
this  deity  establishes  the  laws  by  which  her  intentions  are 
definitively  carried  into  effect.  Compare  also  the  similar 
relation  between  the  direct  speech  in  Column  24_7  and  the  phrase 
garza-me-mah  su-mi-ni-ib-su-du  in  1.  n.  For  another  possi- 
bility, however,  see  immediately  below. 

The  meaning  of  1.  12  is  entirely  obscure  to  me;  the  verbs 
seem  to  be  immab-dQ  and  munin-ga,  so  that  ki-a  and  DI?-ga 
would  probably  be  objects  or  designations  of  the  place  where 
the  actions  take  place.  But  a  verbal  form  ga-mu-ni-in-ga", 

"I  will in  it,"  would  not  be  impossible,  in  which 

case  naturally  11.  10-12  would  be  part  of  the  direct  speech  and 


VOL.  IV. 


24  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

the  subject  of  the  verbs  in  11.  10,  11  and  i2a  would  therefore 
be  "man,"  not  the  deity,  11.  10  and  11  then  forming  simply  an 
amplification  of  11.  8  and  9. 

In  the  last  lines  of  the  first  column,  11.  13-17,  the  narrative, 
after  a  recapitulation  of  the  creation  of  mankind,  turns  to  the 
creation  of  the  animals.  This  recapitulation,  short  as  it  is, 
is  of  the  greatest  value  for  us,  because  it  gives  us  the  names  of 
the  creators  of  mankind,  namely,  An,  Enlil,  Enki  and  Nin-har- 
sagga. 


THE  GODDESS  NIN-HARSAG 

Among  these  four  deities,  the  goddess  Nin-harsagga,  "Lady 
of  the  mountains,"  claims  our  special  interest,  because  our 
tablet  furnishes  the  first  unequivocal  evidence  of  her  participa- 
tion in  the  work  of  creation.  The  list  An  da-nu-um  gives 
as  her  most  common  Semitic  name  belit-ili,  "Lady  of  the  gods," 
of  which  dnin-dingir-e-ne,  one  of  her  Sumerian  names,  is  the 
exact  equivalent.  From  the  inscriptions,  however,  she  is  best 
known,  aside  from  the  name  Nin-harsagga,  as  dmah,  "the  great 
one,"  dnin-mah,  "the  sublime  lady,"  and  dnin-tu  or  dnin-tu, 
the  former  of  which  means  "Lady  of  child-bearing,"  while 
the  latter  has  no  clear  etymology. 

The  name  "Lady  of  the  gods"  clearly  indicates  that  Nin- 
harsag  was  one  of  the  deities  who  held  the  highest  rank  among 
the  great  gods,  and  this  is  fully  borne  out  by  the  fact  that 
in  the  inscriptions  she  is  associated  with  An,  Enlil  and  Enki, 
the  oldest  and  most  important  ruler  gods,  and  not  with  Sin, 
Samas,  Istar,  Adad,  etc.,  the  younger  of  the  great  gods.  It 
will  be  observed  that  in  our  text  she  is  mentioned  after  An, 
Enlil  and  Enki,  which  shows  that  at  the  time  when  the  tablet 
was  written  she  followed  in  rank  these  three  gods.  Exactly 
the  same  order  is  found  in  the  kudurru  inscriptions  of  the 
thirteenth  and  twelfth  centuries  B.  C.,  as  will  be  seen  from  the 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  1 1  X  I  25 

following  list  of  the  gods  mentioned  in  the  imprecations  at 
the  ends  of  these  inscriptions.1 

Susa,  reign  of  Meli-Sipak  (Del.  en  Perse  II,  pi.  21-27)  : 
Anu,  Enlil,  Ea  and  Nin-harsagga  (  =  iliplrabOtipl),  Marduk, 
Sin,  NinIB,  Gula. 

Susa,  reign  of  Marduk-apla-iddina  (Del.  en  Perse  VI, 
pi.  9,  10)  :  Anu,  Enlil,  Ea,  Nin-harsag,  Sin  and  Ningal,  SamaS 
and  A"a,  etc.  (follow  37  other  gods). 

London  105,  PA-SE  dynasty  (3R  41)  :  Anu,  Enlil,  Ea, 
Ninmah  (=  iliplrabutipl),  Sin,  Samas,  Istar,  Marduk,  etc. 

Caillou  de  Michaux,  PA-SE  dynasty  (iR  70)  :  Anu,  Enlil, 
Ea  and  Ninmah  (  =  iliplrabutipl),  Marduk,  Samas,  Sin,  etc. 

Compare  also  the  same  order  in  the  passage  Surpu  IV42; 
4  (=  in  the  fourth  place)  lip-tu-ru  da-nu-um  den-lil  de-a  u  dnin- 
mah. 

Many  of  the  kudurru  inscriptions,  however,  do  not  men- 
tion Nin-mah  at  all,  which  indicates  that  in  the  thirteenth  and 
twelfth  centuries  B.  C,  despite  the  fact  that  Nin-harsagga 
was  one  of  the  highest  of  the  great  deities,  the  cult  of  the 
goddess  did  not  have  the  same  importance  which  it  must 
have  had  at  some  earlier  period.  Note  also  that  in  the  knob 
inscription  of  the  Cassite  king,  Ulaburarias,  of  the  Country 
of  the  Sea,2  she  is  even  relegated  to  the  fifth  place,  the  gods 
being  enumerated  in  the  order  an-nu  dAB(or  nab?=  Enlil) 
dsar-sar  (=Ea),  dmarduk,  dnin-mah;  here  we  notice  evidently 
the  influence  of  the  theology  of  Babylon,  according  to  which 
Marduk  is  the  ruler-god  KO.T  egoxyv  and  therefore  is  placed 
before  Nin-mah.  It  may  perhaps  be  mentioned  here  that  the 
former  deity  seems  to  have  played  a  much  more  important 
role  during  the  earlier  Cassite  period  than  during  the  kingdom 
of  Kardunias  and  the  second  dynasty  of  Isin,  if  we  may  judge 
from  the  fact  that  King  Agum  rebuilt  the  temple  of  Marduk 
at  Babylon,  in  all  its  former  splendor.  During  the  kingdom 


1  See  Hinke,  BE  Ser.  D  IV,  pp.  231-240. 

-  Weissbach,  Bab.  Misc.,  No.  3. 


26  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

of  Kardunias,  however,  the  Enlil  worship,  as  far  as  our  present 
material  allows  us  to  draw  conclusions,  again  gains  the  ascend- 
ancy over  all  other  cults,  probably  because  the  kingdom  of 
Kardunias  had  its  center  in  southern  Babylonia.1  As  we 
shall  see  below,  this  was  probably  likewise  responsible  for  the 
increasing  importance  of  the  cult  of  Nin-harsag  at  that  time. 

In  a  much  earlier  period,  at  the  time  of  Eannadu  (at 
the  beginning  of  the  fourth  millennium  B.  C.)  and  Gudea 
(at  the  beginning  of  the  third  millennium),  however,  Nin- 
harsag  held  an  even  higher  station  than  in  the  kudurru  inscrip- 
tions of  the  Cassite  time,  inasmuch  as  she  then  ranked  imme- 
diately after  An  and  Enlil,  preceding  the  god  Enki.  Cf.,  e.g., 

Eannadu,  Stele  of  Vultures  :  (An  either  mentioned  in  the 
preceding  column  or  not  mentioned  at  all);  En-lil  16-1720; 
Nin-harsag  1721-1822;  En-ki  1823-19;  Sin  20-21;  (lacuna)'; 
Utu  Rev.  1-2;  Nin-ki  3-541. 

Gudea,   Statue   B,  in   the  curses:    8  44an-e  45en-lil-e  46nin- 

har-sag-ge,    47en-ki ge,   4gdsin de,    49<1nin-gir-su.  .  .  .ge, 

etc.  (follow  eleven  other  gods). 

Gudea,     Cyl.    B.  :    12    26an-azag-gi    zi-de-su    mu-ga     131 
den-lil-e  sag-ba  gur-bi-dar  2dnin-har-sag-ge  igi-zi  ba-si-bar  3<1en-ki 
lugal-eridu"-ge  temen-bi  mu-si  4en-zi-sa-.  .......  .-ga-ge  &dsin-e 

me-bi  an-ki-a  im-mi-diri-ga-am,  etc. 

Ibidem:  19  18an  zag-gal-la  mu-na-KU  19an-ra  den-lil  im- 
ma-ni-us  2°den-lil-ra  2ldnin-mah  mu-ni-us  (the  following  lines 
are  missing). 

The  same  sequence  of  the  gods  as  in  these  early  Sumerian 
inscriptions  is  also  presupposed  in  the  list  of  gods  An 
um,  as  may  be  seen  from  its  arrangement: 

Tablet      I.  An  and  his  circle. 

Enlil  and  his  circle. 
Tablet    II.  Mah  (Belit-ili)  and  her  circle. 

Enki  and  his  circle,  including  Marduk. 


da-nu- 


1  Note  also  that  the  names  of  the  Cassite  kings,   Kadasman-Enlil,   Kudur-Enlil,  are  com- 
pounded with  Enlil. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  27 

Tablet  III.  Nanna  and  his  circle. 

Utu  and  his  circle. 
Tablet  IV.   Innanna  and  her  circle. 
Tablet    V.  Nin IB  and  his  circle. 
Tablet  VI.  Nergal  and  his  circle. 

This  fact  proves,  of  course,  that  the  origin  of  the  list  An  |  da- 
nu-um  goes  back  to  a  very  early  time. 

The  inscriptions  with  which  we  have  thus  far  dealt,  and 
which  attribute  so  great  an  importance  to  Nin-harsag,  are  all 
of  South-Babylonian  origin.  An  examination  of  inscriptions 
from  Northern  Babylonia,  however,  shows  that  there  the  Lady 
of  the  gods  did  not  at  any  time  play  an  important  part.  In 
Naram-Sin's  inscription  in  the  fourth  column  of  the  reverse 
of  No.  36,  e.  g.,  she  is  not  mentioned  at  all  among  the  "great 
gods"1  who  are  enumerated  in  the  order:  Innanna-Annunitum, 
Anu,  Enlil,  Zamama,  Sin,  Samas,  Nergal,  Umes  and  Ninkar(a). 
It  will  be  observed  that  the  goddess  Istar  has  here  taken  the 
place  of  the  supreme  ruler-deity  and  that  as  such  she  is  placed 
even  above  Anu  and  Enlil.  On  the  other  hand,  the  inscription 
also  omits  Enki  who  was  likewise  a  deity  primarily  of  the  South. 

As  Nin-harsag,  however,  the  goddess  is  mentioned  in  the 
imprecations  at  the  end  of  the  so-called  cruciform  monument 
in  Column  i226.292,  which  proves  that  she  was  worshipped  in 
Northern  Babylonia  during  the  Sargonic  period;  but  the 
contents  of  the  curse,  namely,  that  she  may  cut  off  the  bringing 
forth  of  children  in  the  land,  shows  that  she  was  worshipped 
there  only  as  goddess  of  birth,  not  as  a  ruler-deity.  In 
the  imprecations  at  the  end  of  his  code  of  laws,  Hammurabi 
enumerates  the  following  great  deities3:  Anu,  Rev.  2645,  Enlil 
2653  (Ninlil  and  Enlil  2631),  Enki  2698,  Samas  .27^,  Sin  2741,  Iskur 
2764,  Zamama  2731,  Innanna  2792,  Nergal  2824,  Nintu  2840  and 
Ninkarrak  2850.  Here  Nin-harsag  is  mentioned  under  her  name 
dnin-tu,  but  she  plays  a  very  subordinate  part,  inasmuch  as 

1  Ll.  15-17,  i-lu  ra-bi-u-tum. 

2  Column  12  26dnin-har-sag-ga  27in  ma-ti-su  28a-la-da-am  29li-ip-ru-us. 

••  Reverse,  Column  2870  ilu  rabutum  (=DINGIR-GAL-GAL)  5a  Sa-me-e  u  ir-$i-tim. 


28  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

she  is  mentioned  as  the  tenth  among  eleven  deities  and  again 
only  in  her  character  as  goddess  of  birth. 

From  the  examination  of  the  inscriptions  it  is  evident 
that  Nin-harsag,  at  least  in  her  character  as  ruler-deity,  was 
a  specifically  South-Babylonian  deity,  an  observation  which, 
moreover,  is  entirely  corroborated  by  the  fact  that  her  principal 
sanctuaries  Kes  and  Adab1  were  both  situated  in  Southern 
Babylonia;  it  even  seems  that  for  this  reason,  at  least  during 
the  oldest  periods  when  the  Sumerians  were  in  full  possession 

1  For  Kes  see,  e.  g.,  Eannadu,  Stele  of  Vultures,  Obv.  18  6<1nin-har-sag-ra  6keskl-su  7.  .  .  . 

[ ];  Rim-Sin,  date  (Strassm.  11  and  12):  mu  dri-im-dsin  lugal  dnin-mah-e  e-keikl- 

temen-an-ki-bi-da-ta  nam-lugal-kalam-kis?-gal-la-su  ba-an-  ....  -la,  etc.;  the  list  of  gods  An  | 
da-nu-um  mentions  as  belonging  to  Ninharsag's  circle  the  god  sa-kisal-nun-na  nimgir  kes[ki. .  .  .  ] 
"prefect  of  Kes"  and  dlugal-igi-ug  nimgir  adabkl  [....]  "prefect  of  Adab." 

For  Adab  see,  beside  the  last  quoted  passage,  the  inscription  of  Lugal-anna-mundu  of 
Adab  (No.  75  and  BE  VI,  Part  2,  No.  130)  which  mentions  our  goddess  as  dnin-tu  in  I.  i,  and  as 
dmah  in  1.  26,  and,  furthermore,  the  inscriptions  excavated  by  Banks  at  Bismya,  e.  g.,  Vase  of 
Mesilim,  Banks,  Bismya,  p.  266: 

1.  me-silim  Mesilim 

2.  lugal  kiS  king  of  Ki<>, 

3.  dumu-ki-ag  beloved  son 

4.  dnin-har-sag  [...]  of  Ninharsag. 

5-  I I---     kf'] 

(Rest  is  missing.) 

Brick  inscription  of  Dungi,  ibid.,  p.  134: 

1.  dnin-har-sag  For  Nin-harsag, 

2.  nin-a-ni  his  lady, 

3.  dun-gi  Dungi, 

4.  nita-kal-ga  the  strong  hero, 

5.  lugal-urikl-ma  king  of  Ur, 

6.  lugal  ki-en-gi  ki-uri-ge  king  of  Sumer  and  AkkaJ 

7.  Bi§kes-sa  her  beloved 

8.  ki-ag-ni  Kessa 

9.  mu-na-du  he  built  for  her. 

(This  inscription,  by  the  way,  proves  that  the  stone  tablet  of  Ur-engar,  OBI,  No.  121, 
came  from  Bismya;  the  last  lines  of  this  inscription  have  to  be  supplemented  and  translated: 

ke$(a)kl  her  beloved 

[k]i-ag-ga-ni  Kes(a) 

[m]u-na-du  he  built  for  her. 

Note  the  variants  gl§kes-sa  and  kes(a)kl;  kes(s)a  evidently  denotes  the  sacred  district  of 
Nin-harsag  which  was  named  for  her  sacred  city  Kes. 

Copper  tablet  of  E-igi-nim-PA-e,  ibid.,  p.  200,  1.  i,  and  No.  311  (of  this  publication), 
which  is  identical  with  the  first-mentioned  inscription. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  29 

of  Southern  Babylonia,  the  idea  of  domination  over  Southern 
Babylonia  was  associated  with  Nin-harsag.  In  this  connection 
it  may  also  be  remembered  that  when  Rim-Sin,  in  the  earlier 
part  of  Samsuiluna's  reign,  caused  a  revolt  of  Southern  Baby- 
lonia against  the  rule  of  the  Akkadians,  the  goddess  Nin-mah, 
as  he  tells  us  in  a  date  formula,  raised  him  to  the  kingship  over 
the  totality(F)  of  the  land1  in  her  temple  KeS(a). 

The  fact  that  Nin-harsag  is  associated  with  the  highest 
of  the  supreme  gods  is  due  entirely  to  her  character  as  a  ruler- 
deity;  for  the  possession  of  royal  power  places  the  divine  ruler 
over  the  other  gods  in  the  same  way  as  it  raises  a  human  king 
above  even  the  most  powerful  of  his  subjects.  This  also  is  the 
simple  reason  why  in  the  earliest  inscriptions  she  ranks  above 
the  god  Enki,  who  was  primarily  a  god  of  wisdom,  etc.,  and 
not  a  god  of  lordship,  a  trait  which  appertains  only  to  Anu 
and  Enlil,  and,  as  we  see  from  the  inscriptions  above  quoted, 
to  Nin-harsag.  There  is,  of  course,  no  doubt  that  originally 
Anu,  the  god  of  Heaven,  the  highest  of  the  gods,  was  worshipped 
as  the  sole  supreme  ruler  of  the  universe.  The  fact  that  already 
in  the  earliest  periods  of  Babylonian  history  to  which  our 
information  goes  back,  Enlil  and  Nin-harsag  are  associated  with 
him  as  gods  of  domination,  presupposes  that  in  still  earlier 
times  these  two  deities  must  have  played  an  important  part 
in  some  significant  political  event  in  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris 
basin.  As  will  be  seen  from  the  title  rubatum  (var.  ru-ba- 
tum)  si-ir-tum  sa  ma-ta-tim,  "the  sublime  lady  of  the  lands," 
given  to  Nin-harsag  by  Hammurabi  in  his  code  of  laws,  the 
theologians  claimed  for  her  the  same  authority  over  the  countries 
of  the  earth  as  otherwise  is  exclusively  ascribed  to  Enlil.  It 
is  thus  evident  that  the  ancient  kingdom  to  whose  political 
predominance  the  goddess  owed  her  rise  to  such  a  supreme 
position  among  the  gods,  must  have  held  sway  not  only  over 
Babylonia,  but  over  all  the  surrounding  countries.  From  the 
human  point  of  view  the  claim  of  the  goddess  to  the  rule  over 

1  The  meaning  of  the  expression  kalam  ki$?-gal-la  or  uku-kis?-gal-la  is  not  quite  certain. 


30  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

the  world  takes  the  form  of  a  bestowal  of  royal  power  and  its 
insignia  upon  the  human  king;  in  the  quoted  date  formula  of 
Rim-Sin,  Ninmah,  therefore,  raises  the  king  to  kingship,  and 
compare  also  Code  of  Hammurabi:  1  50ha-am-mu-ra-bi  ... 
3  24be-lum  zi-ma-at  25ha-at-di-im  26sa  u-sa-ak-li-lu-su  28e-ri-is- 

tum  29dma-ma,  "Hammu-rabi ,  the  lord,  the  adornment1 

of  sceptre  and  tiara  wherewith  the  wise  Mama  has  adorned 
him."  In  her  character  as  bestower  of  the  royal  diadem 
Nin-harsag  was  called  dnin-men-na,"lady  of  the  tiara,"  in  Semitic 
be-lit  me-a-am-mi  and  be-lit  ma-a-mi,  from  which  perhaps  her 
names  dma-ma  and  dma-mi2  have  been  derived.  Of  course, 
she  herself  likewise  wore  the  diadem  as  we  see  from  the  text 
76,  Col.  710.14  where  the  unknown  king,  the  author  of  the  in- 
scription, says  that  he  proceeded  to  the  chamber  of  Nin- 
menna  and  placed  a  golden  tiara  upon  her  head. 

Nin-harsag  is  an  entirely  independent  type  of  the  female 
deity  and  has  nothing  to  do  either  with  Ninlil  or  Istar,  with 
both  of  whom  she  is  usually  identified.3  A  clear  indication  of 
her  independent  character  may  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  she 
appears  as  the  supreme  deity  of  the  cities  where  she  was  wor- 
shipped, whereas  Ninlil,  as  far  as  we  know,  is  always  only  a  re- 
flexion of  Enlil.  Nin-harsag  has  a  husband,  the  god  DUN-PA-e, 
but  he  plays  a  very  insignificant  role  beside  her,  about  such 
a  role  as  the  wife  of  a  great  god  plays  beside  her  husband. 
According  to  the  list  of  gods  An  da-nu-um  (CT  24,  i23;  2O15)  a 
goddess  dbelit(or  rubat)-i-li4  appears  as  the  wife  of  Anu,  and  a 
few  lines  further  on  the  same  deity  is  equated  with  Antum  and 
Istar.  Whether  this  Belit-ili  is  identical  with  Nin-mah,  is 
not  certain,  but  if  so,  the  fact  that  she  is  identified  with  Antum 
as  well  as  Istar  would  at  least  indicate  that  this  goddess  cannot 
originally  have  been  connected  with  Anu  and  his  circle.  It 


1  Perhaps  simtum  has  a  passive  meaning  =  "he  who  is  adorned  with  something." 

2  For  these  names  see  in  the  list  of  ^ods  An      a-nu-um,  CT  24,  12,  25,  the  i8th,  4oth  and 
4ist  names  of  Belit-ili. 

3  Thus,  e.  g.,  Zimmern  in  KT2,  p.  428-430  (Belit-ili  and  Nin-mah  =  Istar)  and  p.  356  (Nin- 
harsag  =  Ninlil);  Jastrow,  Religion  I,  p.  55  (=  Ninlil)  and  p.  252  (=  IStar). 

4  Has  the  name  to  be  read  so? 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  31 

is,  however,  much  more  likely  that  belit-ili  is  simply  the  title 
which  Antum  and  Istar  bore  as  supreme  ruler-deities,  though 
Antum  evidently  only  as  the  counterpart  of  Anum.  The 
orthography  of  the  name  is  clearly  that  of  the  Dynasty  of 
Akkad,  and  it  will  be  remembered  that  Istar  under  Naram-Sin 
is  in  fact  the  highest  of  the  gods,  ranking  even  above  An  and 
Enlil.  On  the  other  hand,  under  the  name  DINGIR-SlG- 
za-gin-na  our  goddess  Belit-ili  (Mah  according  to  a  duplicate), 
as  well  as  her  husband  $UL-PA-e-a  under  the  name  dmaskim- 
miMu-har-ra-an-na,  plays  some  part  in  the  circle  of  Enlil,  CT  24, 
616.17;  although  the  list  does  not  state  what  their  exact  connec- 
tion with  it  was,  yet  from  the  fact  that  DINGIR-SIG-zaginna 
is  mentioned  together  with  Ninlil  and  Suzianna,  the  wives  of 
Enlil,2  it  follows  that  she  too  was  here  conceived  in  the  char- 
acter of  a  female  counterpart  of  Enlil.  Nevertheless,  since 
neither  the  goddess  is  expressly  designated  as  the  wife  of  Enlil, 
nor  her  husband  as  Enlil,  it  is  evident  that  this  combination  in 
the  list  An  da-nu-um  only  indicates  a  general  relation  between 
the  two  ruler-deities,  although  the  mere  fact  that  SIG-zaginna 
is  mentioned  together  with  Ninlil  makes  it  very  likely  that 
the  equation  was  based  on  some  special  local  cult. 

Another  side  of  Nin-harsag's  character  is  that  of  the  mother- 
goddess.  A  comparatively  frequent  appellation  of  hers  is,  e.  g., 
ama-dingir-ri-ne,  "mother  of  the  gods;"  cf.  Ur-Bau,  Statue, 
3  8dnin-har-sag  ama-dingir-ri-ne-ra  e-gir-sukl-ka-ni  2mu-na-du; 
Lu-Utu,  clay  nail,  1  ldnin-har-sag  2ama-dingir-ri-ne-ra,  etc. 
Gudea,  Statue  A,  3  4nin  an-ki-a  nam-tar-ri-de  5dnin-tu  2ama 
dingir-ri-ne-ge,  etc.,  "the  lady  who  determines  the  fate  in  Heaven 
and  upon  earth,  Nintu,  the  mother  of  the  gods,"  etc.3  It  will 


1  See  note  ...  on  p.  ... 
-  The  order  is: 

1.  Ninlil  (7  names)  |  dam-bi  sal. 

2.  Suzianna  |  dam-banda  denlillage,  etc.     Enzikalamma  |  ddam-bi  denlilli! 

3.  DINGIR-SlG-zaginna  |  dbe-lit-i-li.     Ma5kim-mi-lu-harranna  |  dSU 

Suzianna,  to  mention  this  by  the  way,  is  of  course  not  identical  with  Ninlil,  as  usually  is 
stated,  but  another  wiff  (dam-banda)  of  Enlil. 

3  Beginning  of  the  name  of  a  statue  which  Gudea  set  up  in  the  temple  of  Nin-harsag  at  Girsu. 


32  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

be  observed  that  ama-dingir-ri-ne  is  an  exact  parallel  to  the 
appellation  ab-ba-dingir-ri-ne,  "father  of  the  gods,"  which  is 
given  to  the  ruler-god  Enlil;  cf.,  e.  g.,  Entemena,  Cone,  1  l  en-lil 
lugal-kur-kur-ra  3ab-ba  dingir-ri-ne-ge.  The  terms  ab-ba-dingir- 
ri-ne  and  ama-dingir-ri-ne  do  not  necessarily  imply  the  idea  of 
physical  fatherhood  or  motherhood,  but  rather  have  the  mean- 
ing, leader  of  the  gods  or  the  first  of  the  puhur  ili;  nevertheless 
the  origin  of  the  title  undoubtedly  lay  in  the  idea  of  physical 
fatherhood,  for  there  are  many  indications  of  the  belief  among 
the  Babylonians  that  Anu  the  god  of  Heaven  or  the  Heaven 
itself,  and  his  wife  Ki,  "the  earth,"  were  the  progenitors  of  the 
gods.1  From  this  point  of  view  it  would  be  very  tempting  to 
establish  a  connection  between  Nin-harsag  and  Ki,  for  har-sag, 
"mountain,"  or  in  a  collective  sense  "mountains,"  might  very 
well  be  taken  as  an  expression  for  "earth."  Our  present  material, 
however,  does  not  afford  sufficient  evidence  for  this  equation; 
still  it  may  be  kept  in  mind  that  Enlil  also  undoubtedly  had 
originally  some  relation  to  the  earth,  although  in  the  later 
development  of  his  cult  this  side  of  his  character  has  been 
completely  overshadowed  by  other  characteristics. 

A  clear  allusion  to  physical  motherhood,  however,  is  found 
in  two  of  Nin-harsag's  names  in  the  list  An  da-nu-um,  namely, 
dama-tu-u-da  (var.  dama-u-tu-da),  "mother  of  child-bearing," 
and  dama-du-bad  =  ummu  pi-ta-at  bar-ki,  var.  um-mu  pi-ta-a-at 
bir(!)2-ki,  "the  mother  whose  lap  (literally  knees)  is  open(ed)." 
Note  also  that  in  Gudea,  Statue  A,  the  name  Nintu,  which  in 
the  list  An  da-nu-um  is  written  dnin-tu(r)  and  expressly  glossed 
as  (nin-)tu-ur,  is  written  dnin-tu(d),  which  means  "the  lady  of 
child-bearing"  or  the  like;  unless  this  writing  is  due  to  a  mis- 
take of  the  scribe,  which  is  not  at  all  likely,  we  should  have 
here  at  least  an  attempt  to  refer  the  name  to  child-bearing, 
though  the  mere  existence  of  the  form  dnin-tu(r),  dnin-tu-ra 
seems  to  place  it  beyond  any  doubt  that  the  latter  is  the  original 

1  A  remembrance  of  the  supreme  position  of  An  and  Ki  is  still  found  in  the  part  which  they 
play  in  the  incantations;  their  names  have  power  even  over  the  highest  gods. 

2  Cf .  Meissner,  OLZ  109,  Cols.  199-201. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  33 

name.  But  in  the  code  of  Hammurabi,  Rev.  2840,  we  have  the 
same  writing  dnin-tu(d)  again  and  there  the  relation  of  the  god- 
dess to  child-bearing  is  not  liable  to  any  doubt,  because  Ham- 
murabi gives  her  the  predicate  ummum  ba-ni-ti,  "the  mother 
who  has  born  me,"  and  wishes  that  she  may  deny  male  offspring 
to  the  king  who  should  destroy  his  inscription,  and  that  she 
may  not  "create  seed  of  mankind  in  the  midst  of  his  people." 
Notwithstanding  the  obscurity  of  the  etymology  of  the  name 
Nintu(r),  it  seems  to  me,  that  we  have  in  this  side  of  the  char- 
acter of  Nin-harsag  an  original  trait.  It  may  be  expected  that 
the  full  publication  of  the  results  of  the  excavations  at  Bismya 
will  give  us  some  information  on  this  point,  for  Banks  reports 
that  he  found  small  clay  reliefs  "representing  most  obscene 
figures,"  and  although  he  brings  them  into  connection  with 
Istar,  who  likewise  had  a  temple  at  Adab,  called  E-sar  or  E-sar-ra, 
they  may  perhaps  be  votive  objects  presented  to  the  goddess 
of  birth.  Likewise  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  clay  figurines 
which  have  been  found  at  Nippur  and  other  places,  and  which 
represent  a  goddess  suckling  a  child  and  clasping  one  of  her 
breasts,  are  representations  of  Nin-harsag  and  not  of  Ninlil 
as  it  is  mostly  assumed,1  and  the  more  so,  because  we  know 
from  the  inscriptions  that  the  image  of  Nin-harsag  was  con- 
ceived as  that  of  a  mother  suckling  a  child.  In  the  description 
of  images  of  deities,  K  2I482,  it  is  expressly  said  of  dnin-tu  or 
dmah:  5irat-sa  pi-ta-a-at  6ina  GUBU-sa  se-ir-ra  na-sat-ma  UBUR- 
sa  ik-kal  7ina  ZAG-sa  i-kar-rab,  "her  breast  is  open  (i.  e.,  bare?), 
in  her  left  she  carries  a  child  sucking  (?)  her  (left)  breast,  with 
the  right  she  blesses."3  Cf.  also  the  vase  inscription  of  Lugal- 
zaggisi  in  which  this  king  designates  himself  as  1  28ga-zi-ku-a 
29dnin-har-sag,  "who  was  (or  is)  nourished  by  the  true  milk  of 
Nin-harsag."  In  all  likelihood  therefore  the  Mylitta  of  Herod- 
otus also  is  the  goddess  Nin-harsag. 

1  As  images  of  Belit-ili  (  =  litar)  referred  to  by  Zimmern,  KA"P,  p.  429,  note  5. 

2  Bezold,  ZAIX,  p.  121. 

3  The  clay  images  represent  the  goddess  as  clasping  her  right  breast  with  her  right  hand. 
Is  this  perhaps  the  gestus  of  the  karabu? 


34  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

A  feature  of  the  character  of  the  goddess,  widely  different, 
at  least  at  first  sight,  from  those  with  which  we  have  hitherto 
dealt,  refers  to  her  wisdom  and  skill  in  the  handicrafts,  especially 
of  the  carpenter  or  wood-carver,  the  potter  and  the  copper- 
smith. It  will  be  remembered  that  Hammurabi  refers  to  her 
as  eristum  Mama,  "the  wise  Mama."  Then  observe  that  one 
of  her  names  in  the  list  An  da-nu-um  is  dgiirgur-ding\r-ri-ne, 

"coppersmith  of  the  gods,"  another    d[ ]NAGAR-kalam- 

ma,  "coppersmith(?)  of  the  land,"  dnin-pahar,  "lady  potter."1 
What  the  proudest  works  of  her  hands  were,  we  may  again 
infer  from  names  of  hers.  She  was,  £.  g.,  called  nagar-nam- 
lu-gal-lu,  "carpenter  of  mankind;"  dnagar-sa-ga,  "carpenter  of 
the  heart;"  dnig-zi-gal-dim-dim-me  (var.  -ma),  "builder  of  what 

has  breath;"   den-MA  +  SAL-dim,  "the  maker  of  " 

We  see  from  these  names  that  Nin-harsag  once,  no  doubt,  at 
the  time  of  creation,  exerted  her  skill  in  carving  men  as  well 
as  all  other  living  beings  in  wood,  or  in  moulding  them  in  clay, 
and  she  too  made  the  most  wonderful  part  of  the  human  body, 
the  heart  or  the  interior  of  the  body. 


AN,  ENLIL  AND  ENKI  AS  CREATORS. 

The  first  three  of  the  deities  who  created  mankind  accord- 
ing to  our  text,  An,  Enlil  and  Enki,  are  mentioned  as  creators, 
without  Nin-harsag,  in  two  short  school  texts  containing  the 
introductory  phrases  to  an  incantation  or  the  like.  One,  which 
is  written  in  Akkadian,  begins  with  the  words:  Enuma  Anum, 
Enlil,  Ea,  ilf1  rabuti,  ina  milkisuna  kini  usurat  same  u  irsitim 
iskunu,  etc.,  "when  Anu,  Enlil  and  Ea,  the  great  gods,  by 
their  legitimate  counsel  made  the  forms  (images)  of  Heaven 
and  earth,"  etc.  The  other,  Sumerian,  text  contains  the 
same  phrase,  but  in  a  very  corrupted  Sumerian,  and  was  evi- 


1  See  also  Jensen,  KB  6,  i,  p.  544  to  dsu-gal-an-zu. 


A.  POEBEL—  CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  35 

dently  wrongly  reproduced  by  the  pupil;  it  runs:  Q  an-na1 
^n-lil-la1  den-ki  dingir[-gal-gal-e-ne]  malga2-ne-ne-gi-na-ta;<  me- 
gal-gal-la[ ]. 

In  all  instances  where  the  works  of  creation  are  referred 
to,  Anu  as  well  as  Enlil  is  credited  only  with  the  creation  of 
the  universe  in  general  or,  to  use  the  Babylonian  term,  of 
Heaven  and  earth,  but  no  special  creative  work  within  the  uni- 
verse is  ascribed  to  either  of  them,  at  least  not  in  the  material 
known  to  us,  Enki,  however,  is  credited,  e.  g.,  in  Weissbach, 
Miscellen  12,  with  the  creation  of  the  apsu,  the  brick  god, 
vegetation,  mountains,  seas,  the  king  and  mankind,  etc.  The 
reason  for  this  is  evidently  that  Enki  is  a  god  of  wisdom 
and  clever  designs,  qualities  which  are  indispensable  to  a  god 
who  is  to  create  complicated  organisms  such  as  living  beings, 
etc.  It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  respect  Enki  and  Nin- 
harsag  are  deities  of  a  kindred  character,  and  we  may  suppose 
that  this  somehow  or  other  must  have  led  to  contradictory 
or  at  least  parallel  accounts  of  the  creation.  In  our  text  this 
difficulty  is  entirely  avoided  by  the  general  statement  that 
mankind  was  made  by  the  four  creators. 

So  far  as  we  know  of  Anu's  and  Enlil's  character,  it  is  not 
likely  that  there  ever  existed  the  belief  that  they  tried  their 
hand  at  special  creative  acts  requiring  any  display  of  wisdom 
and  skill.  Their  share  in  the  creation  of  mankind  consisted 
probably  in  the  mere  expression  of  their  desire  to  have  the 
earth  peopled  with  living  beings  while  they  left  it  to  the  other 
gods,  especially  to  the  gods  of  wisdom  and  skilled  handicraft, 
to  devise  the  necessary  means  and  to  execute  their  wishes. 
Indeed  the  ordinary  procedure  in  all  that  is  done  by  the  ruling 
god  is  that  he  convenes  the  assembly  of  the  gods  to  ask  their 


1  The  a  after  an  and  denlil  is  entirely  uncalled  for. 

1  MAL+GA  =  malga  is  loanword  from  the  Semitic  milku;  for  the  pronunciation,  see 
Cl i  12,  34i3a. 

3  The  pupil  made  the  mistake  of  following  the  position  of  the  words  in  Akkadian;  in  correct 
Sumerian  the  sequence  of  the  words  is  of  course,  malga-gina-(a)nene-ta.  See  U.M.B.S.,  Vol.  VI, 
Chapter  I,  Grammatical  Texts. 


36  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

advice  which  he  is  likely  to  follow,  and  evidently  the  procedure 
in  the  creation  will  not  have  made  an  exception  to  this  rule. 
Note  that  CT  13,  34  states  expressly  that  the  gods  in  their 
assembly  created  Heaven,  earth  and  all  things,1  and  that  accord- 
ing to  the  practice  tablets  above  quoted,  Anu,  Enlil  and  Ea 
first  deliberated  with  one  another  before  they  began  the  work 
of  creation.  Thus  also  Marduk  in  the  epic  Enuma  elis  first 
communicates  his  plan  to  create  man  to  the  gods,2  and,  although 
the  following  part  of  the  poem  is  most  fragmentary,  yet  enough 
remains  to  show  us  that  Ea  aids  him  with  his  counsel  and 
perhaps  this  god  and  eventually  another  deity  even  actually 
effected  the  creation  of  man,  though  the  process  of  substituting 
Marduk  in  the  role  of  older  gods  may  very  well  have  already 
been  carried  so  far  as  to  ascribe  to  him  the  actual  creation  of 
man,  which  would  be  quite  possible  since  Marduk  is  a  god  of 
wisdom. 

As  the  relation  between  Nin-harsagga  and  Enki,  so  also 
that  between  An  and  Enlil  with  regard  to  their  respective  part 
in  the  creation  of  man  is  left  entirely  undetermined  by  the 
general  character  of  the  statements  in  our  text.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  either  god  must  have  played  about  the  same  role 
as  the  other,  since  both  are  essentially  ruler-deities;  the  difficulty 
which  naturally  arises  from  this  fact,  was,  however,  overcome 
by  the  doctrine  that  the  power  of  the  supreme  god  might  be 
exercised  by  another  ruler-god  in  consequence  of  the  former's 
resolution  to  confer  his  own  power  upon  the  other,  thus  making 
him  the  legitimate  ruler.  The  epic  Enuma  elis  therefore  relates 
at  length  how  the  Anutu,  i.  e.,  the  supreme  power  and  functions 
of  Anum,  was  conferred  on  Marduk;  and  although  as  yet  we 
have  no  direct  testimony  for  a  similar  legal  transfer  of  Anu's 
power  to  Enlil,  yet  the  constant  association  of  Anu  and  Enlil 
in  the  inscriptions  and  the  fact  that  the  term  Enlilutu  expresses 
on  the  whole  the  same  idea  as  Anutu,  leave  no  doubt  that 


1  E-nu-ma  ilipl  i-na  bu-uh-ri-su-nu  ib-nu-u  [ ],  etc. 

2  Tablet  VI,  at  the  beginning. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  37 

the  doctrine  above  referred  to  was  likewise  applied  to  the  rela- 
tion between  Enlil  and  Anu,  i.  e.,  that  Enlil  became  "the  Anu," 
as  Marduk  later  became  "the  Enlil."  This  latter  relation  has 
often  been  conceived  as  an  identification  of  Marduk  with  Enlil, 
and  here,  as  in  many  other  cases,  the  tendency  to  identify  dis- 
tinctly separate  gods  has  played  a  somewhat  unfortunate 
part.  That  here  we  have  a  relation  quite  different  from  what 
is  implied  by  the  term  "identical,"  is  clearly  shown  by  the 
fact  that  although  Enlil  acts  in  the  character  of  Anu,  and 
Marduk  later  in  the  character  of  Enlil,  yet  Anu  as  well  as 
Enlil  never  ceased  to  be  distinct  and  independent  gods  and 
what  is  more,  always  remained  the  highest  of  the  gods  and 
the  ultimate  legal  source  of  divine  power.  A  most  instructive 
illustration  of  this  conception  is,  e.  g.,  the  beginning  of  the 
inscriptions  of  Samsuiluna  LIH  97-99,  according  to  which  An 
and  Enlil  look  favorably  upon  Marduk,  confer  the  lordship 
over  the  four  quarters  of  the  world  upon  him,  etc.,  wherea ; 
Marduk,  who  is  now  "the  Enlil  of  his  land,"1  entrusts  the 
shepherding  of  the  land,  etc.,  to  Samsuiluna,  the  human  ruler. 
It  is  clear  that  Marduk  simply  acts  as  Enlil  by  performing  his 
functions  as  ruler,  but  he  is  as  little  identical  with  Enlil  as 
Samsuiluna  with  Marduk.  Our  own  text  is  likewise  an  example 
for  this  peculiar  theological  problem,  for  throughout  the  tablet 
neither  An  nor  Enlil  is  mentioned  alone,2  though  six  times  their 
names  are  mentioned  together  (ha  3is,i9  410637);  moreover,  it  will 
be  observed  that  in  689  the  verbal  forms  of  which  an-den-lil 
is  the  subject,  are  in  the  singular,  so  that  it  is  very  likely  that 
an-den-lil  has  to  be  translated  "the  Anu  Enlil,"  i.  e.,  Enlil  repre- 
senting not  only  his  own  power,  but  also  the  authority  of  An. 
Viewed  from  a  literary  point  of  view  this  combination  of  the 
names  of  the  two  gods  evidently  indicates  a  conscious  blending 
of  two  separate  versions  of  the  deluge  story,  one  with  Anum  and 
the  other  with  Enlil  as  the  chief  god.  It  may  be  recalled  that, 


1  LI.  17,  18:  den-lil  kalam-ma-na  =  den-lil  ma-ti-Su. 

2  Except  An  in  zi-an-na  zi-ki-a  61. 


38  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

according  to  the  introduction  to  the  deluge  story  which  is 
inserted  in  the  Gilgames  epic,  Anu  is  the  supreme  deity,  "the 
father  of  the  gods;"1  yet  later  on  Enlil  alone  appears  as  the 
ruler  of  the  gods,  a  clear  indication  that  also  in  this  account 
two  separate  versions,  one  with  Anum  and  one  with  Enlil  as 
the  chief  deity,  have  been  fused  into  one.  As  a  version  which 
recognizes  Enlil  alone  as  the  ruling  god,  the  Atra-hasis  epic 
may  be  cited,  in  which  Enlil  is  described  as  the  father  of  the 
gods,  that  is,  he  is  here  given  also  the  title  and  the  position 
which  Anu  holds  in  the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic.  At  the 
present  we  know  unfortunately  almost  nothing  of  the  various 
forms  in  which  the  story  must  have  been  told  at  the  various 
Babylonian  sanctuaries;  but  from  the  above  remarks  we  may 
at  least  conclude  that  there  existed  at  -Uruk  and  other  sacred 
cities  of  Anu  a  version  in  which  Anu  still  figured  alone  in  his 
supreme  power. 

As  we  have  seen  that  Nin-harsag  also  was  a  ruler-deity, 
the  question  may  be  asked  as  to  whether  perhaps  a  version 
of  the  creation  story  did  not  exist  in  which  she  not  only  appeared 
in  the  role  of  Enki  as  the  wise  maker  of  human  beings,  etc., 
but  at  the  same  time  in  the  role  of  Enlil  and  Anu.  This  ques- 
tion, however,  cannot  be  answered  with  the  help  of  our  present 
material.  An  indication  might  perhaps  be  seen  in  the  repent- 
ance of  Belit-ili  in  the  deluge  story  of  the  Gilgames  epic  for 
having  spoken  unfavorably  of  mankind  in  the  assembly  of  the 
gods  and  having  ordered  a  "fight"  to  destroy  her  people;2  this 
incident  may  very  well  have  been  taken  from  a  version  in 
which  Nin-harsag  played  a  more  prominent  part  than  she  does 
in  the  present  form  of  the  epic. 

The  post-positive  element  a-ba  after  mu-un-dim-es,  in  1.  14', 
has  the  force  of  a  verbal  conjunction  meaning  "after,"  "when" 


'Gilg.  Ep.  XI,  15. 
»Gilg.  Ep.  Xlm. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  39 

(with  pluperfect).  It  seems  to  me  that  ba  contains  the  demon- 
strative element  bi  and  the  locative  element  a  =  "upon  (the 

occurrence  of)  this ,"  the  first  a  being  probably  identical 

with  the  relative  a  which  gives  definite  verbal  forms  the  force 
of  a  noun;  possibly  we  may  have  to  render  the  demonstrative 
idea  of  bi  by  adding  a  "thus"  :  "after  thus  they  had  created."1 
Whether,  on  the  other  hand,  it  has  some  connection  with  the 
dialectical  substantive  a-ba  (for  a-ga)  =  ar-ka-tum  5  R  1 1^ 
must  remain  doubtful  for  the  present.2 

Line  1 5  evidently  related  a  special  work  of  creation  which 
was  achieved  between  the  creation  of  man  and  of  the  animals; 
but  as  it  is  not  possible  to  identify  with  certainty  the  second 
sign  of  the  word  nig-x  which  denotes  the  object  of  this  creative 
act,  I  cannot  offer  a  definite  suggestion  for  the  meaning  of  this 
line.  In  6n  we  find  nig-x  in  the  genitive  :  mu-nig-x-ma,  "the 

name  of  the ,"  from  which  we  can  probably  conclude 

that  the  phonetic  value  of  the  unidentified  sign  ended  with  m. 
In  65  the  ma  after  nig-x  seems  to  be  a  mistake  of  the  scribe 
and  to  have  therefore  been  erased.  Unfortunately  also  the 
exact  meaning  of  the  following  word  ki-ta,  "that  which  is 
below,"  in  our  passage  is  not  quite  clear:  perhaps  "ground" 
or  "depth  (of  the  ground  or  the  waters?);"  apparently  the 
first  ki-ta  forms  a  genitive  to  nig-x,  while  the  following  ki-ta 
seems  to  be  subject  or  secondary  object  of  mu-dib-dib.  Accord- 
ing to  our  passage  the  nig-x  is  the  product  of  the  ki-ta;  accord- 
ing to  65  it  rises  up  from  something,  perhaps  from  the  waters 
of  the  flood;  it  seems  to  play  some  important  part  in  the  salvation 
of  Ziugiddu,  for  according  to  6n,  if  this  passage  is  correctly  inter- 
preted, it  is  given  the  name  "which  saved  the  seed  of  mankind." 

1  It  will  be  possible  to  determine  the  exact  meaning  of  -aba  only  after  we  have  a  larger 
material  at  our  disposal. 

2  In  the  passage  Rim-Sin,  stone  tablet,  15e-a-ni  nig  u-wWi-a-ta16  ba-du  •  a-ba  ba-sun  we  might, 
accordingly,  take  a-ba  either  as  post-positive  conjunction  and  connect  it  with  the  preceding 
ba-du:    "his  house  which,  after  it  had  been  built  in  old  times,  had  been  destroyed,"  or  we 
might  take  it  as  an  adverb  and  connect  it  with  the  following  verb,  "which  had  been  built  and 
later  on  had  been  destroyed."     In  view  of  the  use  of  aba  as  a  post-positive  element  in  our  text, 
the  first  explanation  is  perhaps  preferable,  though  by  no  means  certain. 


VOL.  IV. 


40  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

As  Zi-ugiddu  prostrates  himself  before  Enlil  after  the  nig-x 
has  risen  (from  the  waters?),  it  probably  is  in  some  way  or 
other  connected  with  the  presence  of  Enlil,  and  therefore  we 
might  perhaps  think  of  some  such  meaning  as  "land,"  "stretch 
of  land,"  though  other  meanings  as,  e.  g.,  "vegetation,"  etc., 
are  quite  possible. 

Dib-dib  perhaps  =  dussu,  "to  cause  to  be  abundant," 
"to  cause  to  sprout  up;"  or  =  sutuqu,  etc.? 

For  references  to  the  creation  of  the  animals  see  CTi3, 

34(0741)3,4:  bu-ul  seri  [u-ma-a]m  seri ;  CTi3,  3522' 

MAS-ANSU  nig-zi-gal  edin-na  ba-du  =  bu-ul  seri  si-kin  na- 
pis-ti  ina  si-e-ri  ib-ta-ni.  According  to  our  passage  the  animals 
were  created  after  man  just  as  in  the  second  Biblical  creation 
story  in  Genesis  2;  we  may  conclude  that  this  was  likewise 
the  order  of  the  creation  in  the  epic  Enuma  elis,  for  Marduk's 
speech  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  tablet  refers  to  the  creation 
of  man  only,  and  the  animals,  therefore,  will  have  been  created 
only  after  man  that  he  might  rule  over  them.  The  text  CT  13, 
343.6  mentions  the  animals  of  the  plain  before  the  namasse 
ali,  "the  city  tribes,"  i.  e.,  "men,"  but  in  this  passage  animals 
and  men  are  taken  together  as  siknat  napisti,  "living  creatures," 
in  1.  3,  and  the  writer  of  the  text  therefore  may  not  have  intended 
to  observe  a  strict  chronological  sequence  in  these  details. 
In  CT  13,  3520.22  again  the  beasts  of  the  plain  are  created  after 
men;  moreover,  it  will  be  observed  that  in  this  text  those 
beasts  which  live  in  the  river  marshes  and  on  the  mountains 
are  created  even  later,  because  marshes  and  mountains  were 
made  later  than  the  level  country  in  which  the  creation  of 
man  and  the  animals  of  the  plain  took  place. 

COLUMN  2 

The  broken  lines  in  the  upper  part  of  the  preserved  por- 
tion of  Column  2  again  contain  a  direct  quotation  in  which,  as  in 
Column  i,  a  deity  explains  his  intentions  with  regard  to  some 
subject,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  verbal  forms 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  41 

begin  with  ga,  "1  will."  There  is  not  enough  preserved  to 
make  out  the  general  trend  of  the  speech,  but  from  the  recapitu- 
lation in  11.  8-m  it  follows  that  it  referred  to  the  establishment 
of  the  kingdom  which  was  bestowed  upon  one  of  the  created 
men.  The  statement  as  to  what  god  is  speaking,  is  not  pre- 
served, but  as  will  be  seen  further  below,  there  is  little  doubt 
that  it  was  the  Anu  Enlil.  The  recapitulation  is  followed,  in 
1.  11,  by  the  phrase  garza-me-mah  su-mi-ni-ib-su-du  referring 
to  the  effective  establishment  by  this  god  of  the  divine  laws 
by  which  the  kingdom  existed.1 

The  following  lines,  12-19,  re^er  to  the  founding  of  five 
cities  and  their  bestowal  upon  certain  gods  who  are  called 
kab-dQ-ga's,  a  term  which  later  on  is  also  used  of  the  amaru, 
the  deluge  demon.  As  the  first  of  these  cities  is  Eridu,  the  city 
of  Nudimmut  or  Enki,  it  is  clear  that  somewhere  in  the  pre- 
ceding, but  now  missing  portions  of  the  text,  the  founding  of 
Uruk,  the  city  of  Anu,  and  of  Nippur,  the  city  of  Enlil,  must  have 
been  reported,  and  it  would  be  natural  that  the  first  institution 
of  the  kingship,  which  is  the  subject  of  the  preceding  lines,  is 
connected  with  the  founding  of  these  cities  of  the  ruling  gods, 
since  according  to  the  belief  of  the  Babylonians  the  human  king 
officiated  as  the  vicegerent  of  the  god  of  domination.  We  may 
recall  in  this  connection  that  according  to  Berosus,  who  in 
every  point  follows  the  traditions  of  the  Marduk  cult,  Alorus, 
the  first  of  the  prediluvian  kings,  was  a  Chaldean  from  Babylon, 
the  city  of  the  creator  Marduk.2  It  is  very  likely  that  this  ver- 
sion of  the  beginning  of  the  history  of  Babylonia,  which,  of 
course,  shows  the  influence  of  the  theology  of  Babylon,  had 
superseded  an  older  tradition  which  located  the  first  king  in  the 
city  of  the  god  who  was  then  the  supreme  ruler-deity,  namely, 
Anu  or  Enlil.  A  strong  support,  if  not  the  final  evidence, 

1  Concerning  the  first  institution  of  the  Babylonian  kingdom  by  a  god  compare  the  quota- 
tion from  Abydenus'  "History  of  the  Chaldeans"  in  Eusebius'  Chronicon  (Syncellus,  p.  38  C); 
PaaiXfvaai  Be  TT/S  X^Pa<:  Tpurov  Aeya  aXw/oov    rov  Se   virtp   CWVTOV  \6yov  StaSorwi  OTI 
fjiiv  TOV  A£U>  TTOt/^e'va  6  0eos  ctTroSetigai. 

2  Eusebius,    Chronicon,    Chapter    I,   after   Apollodorus    (excerpt    in   Syncellus): 


42  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

for  our  conclusions  concerning  the  founding  of  Uruk  and  Nippur 
before  Eridu  and  the  other  sacred  cities  may  be  found  in  the 
fact  that  in  the  creation  text  CT  13,  3^f  the  sacred  cities  are 
built  in  the  following  sequence:  first  Eridu,  the  city  of  Ea, 
Marduk's  father,  1.  12,  Babylon,  the  own  city  of  Marduk,  1.  14, 
and  only  then  after  the  creation  of  mankind,  animals,  vegeta- 
tion, bricks,  etc.,  Nippur,  the  city  of  Enlil,  1.  39,  and  Uruk, 
the  city  of  Anu,  1.  40.  The  tendency  to  have  the  city  of  the 
supreme  god  founded  first  is  made  here  the  more  conspicuous 
by  the  fact  that  the  text  originally,  before  it  was  adapted  to 
the  requirements  of  the  Marduk  worship,  conceded  the  first 
place  among  the  gods  to  Enlil,  and  the  glory  of  being  founded 
first  to  the  city  of  Nippur;  for  in  that  part  of  the  text  which 
emphasizes  the  original  non-existence  of  the  sacred  cities,  their 
sequence  is  Nippur,  1.  6,  Uruk,  1.  7,  and  Eridu,  1.  8,  while  no 
mention  at  all  is  made  of  Babylon.  But  even  in  this  earlier 
form  of  the  text  we  may  already  trace  the  same  tendency; 
for  the  fact  that  Enlil's  city  Nippur  is  built  before  that  of  the 
highest  god  Anu,  can  be  accounted  for  only  on  the  assumption 
that  the  original  text  was  written  at  a  time  when  Enlil,  not 
Anum,  was  the  supreme  ruler  of  Babylonia.1 

1  5  R  44,  Column   2n  mentions    a   king   LAL-ur-alim-ma  (translated    DU-GA(  =  tab-ut-li- 
enlil)  who  according  to  5  R  47,  Rev.  5  dwelt  in  Nippur  (a-sib  Nippuriki).     As  we  do  not  know  of 

a  post-diluvian  dynasty  of  Nippur,  there  is  a  possibility  that  he  is  the  first  prediluvian  king 
whom  Enlil  established  at  Nippur  immediately  after  he  had  founded  this  city.  In  this  case  the 
name  of  the  first  king  Aloros  might  very  well  be  abbreviated  and  corrupted  from  Lal-ur-alimma. 
Apart  from  the  poetical  composition  4  R6o*(6y)  A — G,  which  depicts  the  sufferings  of  LAL- 
ur-alimma,  and  of  which  5  R  47  is  a  commentary,  LAL-ur-alimma  is  mentioned  in  line  2'  of  the 
reverse  of  the  text  published  by  King  in  STG  II,  pp.  216  and  217,  where  instead  of  the  sign 
AMAR  +  SE  at  the  beginning  of  the  line  the  original  has  evidently  the  sign  LAL.  The  passage, 
which  as  far  as  I  know  has  hitherto  escaped  observation,  runs: 

2  LAL!  :  da-a-bi  :  ur  :  utMum  :  a[lim  :  den-lil ] 

3  mu-su-u  sa  sar  nippurki  :  SUL-MU.[ ] 

4  GIS-MES-ki-in-gi-ra  :  hu-la-me  s[u? ] 

5  ki-in-gi  :  nippurkl  :  ir  :  sa-la-la[ ] 

Note  that  here  LAL-ur-alimma  is  evidently  king  of  Nippur  according  to  1.  3,  and  that  kingi 
(=  kengi)  is  equated  with  Nippur,  so  that  the  historical  titles  "en  of  Kengi"  and  "king  of  Kengi" 
denote  domination  over  Nippur  and  evidently  claim  to  be  a  renewal  of  the  title  of  the  first  king 
after  the  creation.  We  may  conclude  from  this  that  the  Sumerian  equivalent  for  sar  nippurikl 
in  1.  3,  with  which  1.  2  must  have  closed,  was  lugal-ki-in-gi-ra. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  4J 

Judging  from  the  order  in  which  the  gods  rank  in  our 
text,  it  might  be  expected  that  the  city  bad-NAGAR  +  DI$ki 
in  1.  1 6  was  the  sacred  and  chief  city  of  the  goddess  Nin-harsag; 
but  as  the  name  of  the  city  and  that  of  the  deity  to  whom  the 
city  is  given  are  otherwise  unknown,  it  is  impossible  to  come 
to  any  conclusion  on  this  point. 

The  city  of  Larak,  which  is  bestowed  upon  the  god  Pa- 
bil-har-sag,  is,  of  course,  identical  with  Larancha1,  which  accord- 
ing to  Berosus  was  the  seat  of  the  last  three  prediluvian  kings, 
or  at  least  the  seat  of  Amempsinos  and  Otiartes,  since  it  is  not 
expressly  stated  that  Xisuthros,  the  son  of  Otiartes,  lived  in 
Larancha.  The  name  of  the  city  is  here  written  phonetically 
la-ra-ak  without  the  determinative  ki;  as  AIula-rak,  the  city,  is 
mentioned  in  the  Assyrian  eponym  chronicle  under  the  second 
year  of  King  Sanherib.  According  to  the  syllabaries  la-rag  and 
la-ra-ag  are  the  phonetic  readings  of^f^f^"  and  ^^^ ^jEf" > 
/'.  e.,  larakl(g)  and  lara-a(g)kl.  In  the  former  writing  the  city 
is  several  times  mentioned  in  Persian  times  in  the  business 
documents  of  the  house  of  Murasu  at  Nippur  (BE  X,  365,8, 
37?,  4ie,9»  887,  ioi5;  PBS  II,  1815,7),  and  from  this  source  we 
gather  the  important  information  that  the  city  was  situated  on 
the  old  Tigris.2  Since  the  former  course  of  the  Tigris  is  approxi- 
mately represented  by  the  Satt-el-Hai,  which  leaves  the  present 
Tigris  at  Qut-el-Amara,  the  site  of  the  city  of  Larak  may  be 
looked  for  in  one  of  the  tells  in  the  vicinity  of  that  water-course, 
not  far  from  the  place  where  it  comes  nearest  to  Nippur.  The 
supposed  "ideographic  writings"  of  the  name  are  in  reality 
old  phonetic  writings  la-laki(g)  and  la-la-aki(g),  which  show 
the  same  phonetic  relation  to  the  later  pronunciation  larak, 
as,  e.  g.,  the  pronunciation  illag  shows  to  uruk.3  These  writings 

1  Eusebius,  Chronicon,  Chapter  I   (Syncellus):    eV  Xapuy^wv,    variant   of  the   Armenian 
version:    Lanchara,  Chanchara,  Ilanchara. 

2  PBS  II,  i8i6>7  :  3a  ina  ali  Iarakkl  kiSad  nfirlidiglat  la-bi-ri;   BE  X.  368  : 55  kiSad  ^'idiglat 
la-bi-ri  sa  ina  larak1'',  etc. 

3  In  the  name  of  this  city  we  have  an  interchange  of  1,  n  and  r:  unu(g),  uruk,  illag;  cf.  the 
same  change  in  idigna,  idiglat  and  tigris.     The  second  of  the  above-mentioned  writings,  namely 
la-la-a(g)kl,  seems  to  indicate  that  the  stress  was  on  the  second  syllable,  as  is  likewise  indicated 
by  the  nasalization  of  the  X  in  the  Greek  Aapayxa- 


44  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

evidently  go  back  to  a  very  old  time,  possibly  even  before 
the  Sumerians  occupied  Babylonia,  although  it  is  quite  con- 
ceivable that  the  change  of  the  second  1  to  r  took  place  within 
the  older  Sumerian  period. 

The  chief  deity  of  Larak,  Pa-bil-har-sag,  is,  so  far  as  I 
know,  not  mentioned  again  in  the  inscriptions  outside  our 
passage.1  This  seems  to  indicate  that  the  tradition  concern- 
ing Larak  goes  back  to  a  very  remote  period.  The  city  was 
evidently  destroyed  in  that  early  time,  and  as  it  is  not  before 
the  neo-Babylonian  period  that  the  place  is  again  mentioned, 
we  may  assume  that  throughout  the  earlier  periods  of  Baby- 
lonian history.it  lay  in  ruins  and  was  known  only  as  a  till 
abubi  or  a  "deluge  ruin." 

Sippar,  the  fourth  of  the  prediluvian  cities,  is  mentioned 
in  the  extracts  from  Berosus,  under  the  designation  73-0X15  iJXtou 
o-urTra/oa,2  as  the  place  where  the  "scriptures"  were  buried  before 
the  deluge.3  As  En-me-dur-an-ki,  who  is  doubtless  identical 
with  Evedorachos,  the  seventh  of  the  prediluvian  rulers,  is 
a  king  of  Sippar,4  it  follows  that  Pantibiblon  or  Pautibiblon,5 
the  city  of  Evedorachos,  is  identical  with  Sippar,  provided, 
of  course,  that  Berosus'  words  have  been  correctly  rendered 
by  his  excerptors.  In  this  case  Pautibiblon  is  perhaps  cor- 
rupted from  Par-kib-nun,  which  might  be  the  phonetic  reading 
of  the  signs  with  which  the  name  of  Sippar  is  usually  written. 

1  An  identification  with  the  similar  name  dpa-bil-sag  is,  of  course,  impossible  if  the  har  in 
our  passage  is  correct.     What  Pa-bil-har-sag's  relation  was  to  the  "Lady  of  Larak"  (gasan  lara- 
akt-ge)  who  is  mentioned  SBH  4914;    51  Obv.u;    52  Obv.n,  cannot  be  ascertained. 

2  Eusebius,  Chronicon,  Chapter  III  (Syncellus):  fv  iroAei  17X10^  (ri(rirapoi.s  (  =  a-iinrapois) ; 
ibidem:  «K   cricrTrapcov. 

3  The  scriptures  are  buried  in  order  to  preserve  the  revelations  concerning  the  origin  of  the 
world,  and  especially  concerning  the  human  arts,  vocations,  etc.,  for  the  post-diluvian  race. 
The  burial  of  the  scriptures  is  therefore  a  parallel  to  the  report  in  the  version  of  the  GilgameS  epic 
that  Ut-napistim  took  on  his  boat  all  kinds  of  artisans  or  learned  men  (marepl  um-ma-ni)  by  whom 
the  arts  could  be  transmitted.     It  is  evidently  for  this  reason  that  this  version  does  not  mention 
the  burial  of  the  scriptures,  which  seems,  moreover,  originally  to  have  been  the  local  tradition 
of  Sippar  only.     The  version  of   Berosus,  on  the  other  hand,  for  the  same  reason,  omits  the 
report  concerning  the  saving  of  the  artisans. 

4  Zimmern,  Ritualtafeln  241,28. 

5  Syncellus:  Pantibibla  and  Pantibiblia. 


A.  POEBEL— CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  45 

Surruppak,  modern  Fara,  finally,  is  the  well-known  city  of 
Ut(a)-napistim,  the  hero  of  the  deluge  story  in  the  Gilgames' 
epic.  Whether,  however,  it  is  the  city  of  Ziugiddu  also,  is  not 
evident  from  the  preserved  portion  of  the  tablet,  but  the  fact 
that  Surruppak  is  mentioned  as  the  last  of  the  prediluvian  cities, 
may  very  well  point  in  this  direction.  For  it  is  quite  possible 
that  the  enumeration  of  the  seven  prediluvian  cities  not  only 
reflects  the  rank  of  the  gods  by  whom  they  were  ruled,  but  also 
denotes,  at  least  in  some  of  the  versions,  the  sequence  of  the 
various  prediluvian  dynasties.  We  are,  however,  not  able 
to  prove  this  point  from  what  at  the  present  is  our  only  source, 
namely,  the  extracts  from  Berosus,  in  which  only  three  cities 
are  mentioned  in  the  order,  Babylon — Sippar(?) — Larak. 

The  deity  of  Surruppak  is  written  with  the  same  signs 
as  the  city,1  a  phenomenon  which  we  may  likewise  observe 
in  the  writing  of  den-lil  and  EN-LI  Ll1,  dnina  and  nina1',  diskur 
and  lSKURkl;  but  whether  the  pronunciation  of  the  name 
of  the  deity  corresponds  to  that  of  the  city,  we  do  not  know. 
According  to  the  list  An  da-nu-um,  CT  24,  5  Col.  28  and  22109a, 
dSU-KUR-RU  is  a  name  of  Ninlil. 

Lines  20  and  21,  which  form  the  transition  to  the  next 
work  of  creation,  again  take  up  the  sentence  begun  in  1.  13 
and  interrupted  by  the  explanatory  sentences  14-19. 

The  exact  meaning  of  the  last  two  lines  of  Column  2  (11.  22 
and  23)  and  even  the  grammatical  analysis  of  the  first  of  these 
lines  is  still  doubtful;  but  it  seems  to  me  that  the  passage 

1  The  form  and  arrangement  of  the  signs  vary  considerably.  In  the  oldest  texts  we  find 
a  single  sign  which  is  compounded  of  SU?,  KUR  and  RU  (SUP+KUR+RU);  cf.  REG  190  bu; 
in  SBH  8i6  =  CTi6,  365,  the  two  signs  LAM  +  KUR  and  RU  (LAM  +  KUR-RUki,  Semitic 
equivalent  Su-ru-ub-ba-ak);  in  our  text,  CTn,  49™  and  SBH  8212,  three  signs  SU-KUR-RU 
(SU-KUR-RUkl  =  Su-ru-ub-bak;  dSU-KUR-RU  SBH  8a«). 

The  signs  LAM  +  KUR-RUkl  have  also  the  phonetic  value  aratta  when  they  are  the  "ideo- 
gram" for  kabtum  "mighty,"  "lofty,"  Smith,  Misc.  Texts  25,  26,  Obv.47;  for  arattu,  loan 
word  of  the  same  meaning,  ibid.4s;  for  tanadatu  "loftiness,"  "splendor,"  "glory,"  ibid.a. 
and  for  tanittu  Si  Sa-ri-.  .[...]  "splendor,"  "loftiness"  of  -.  . .,  CT  19,  253,,  +  K  13618. 

(SAI  6813).  The  first  element  of  this  value  is  evidently  identical  with  ar  or  ar(a),  ar-ri  (  =  ar- 
ri(t)?)  =  tanittum  "glory,"  etc.  As  far  as  we  know  there  is  no  city  Aratta  (Zimmern,  KATa, 
p.  533),  although  aratta,  "the  lofty  one,"  may  very  well  have  been  a  byname  of  Surruppak; 
or  was  aratta  the  name  of  the  deity  DINGIR-§URRUBBA(K)? 


46  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

deals  with  the  creation  of  rivers  or  canals,  and  lakes  or  ponds, 
if  we  have  thus  to  translate  the  word  su-luh.1  From  this  we 
may  further  conclude  that  the  signs  a-an  in  1.  22  do  not  repre- 
sent the  ending  am,  but  the  word  seg,  "rain,"  the  water  of  which 
evidently  serves  to  fill  the  rivers  and  the  ponds  mentioned  in  the 
following  line.  This  latter  line  seems  to  relate  that  Enlil  placed 
in  these  rivers  and  ponds  some  objects,  called  nig-har-har(F), 
perhaps  denoting  certain  living  creatures(F)  or  the  like.  That 
this  account  of  the  creation  of  rivers  and  ponds  follows  that 
of  the  founding  of  cities,  is  easily  understood,  since  the  canals, 
etc.,  supply  the  necessary  water  for  the  cities  and  the  temples 
of  the  gods.  The  creation  of  the  two  large  rivers,  Tigris  and 
Euphrates,  however,  had  evidently  already  taken  place  before 
any  of  the  cities  was  built,  and  therefore  must  have  been  related 
in  the  upper  portion  of  Column  2  which  is  now  missing;  note 
that  also  in  CT  13,  35  the  creation  of  the  Tigris  and  the  Eu- 
phrates is  placed  between  the  creation  of  man  and  the  founding 
of  the  cities  of  Nippur,  etc. 


COLUMN  3 

In  the  preserved  portion  of  Column  3  the  narrative  has 
already  turned  to  the  creation  story.  The  few  legible  words  in 
the  broken  lines  at  the  beginning  evidently  refer  to  the  resolution 
of  the  gods  to  send  a  rainstorm.  The  first  of  the  lines  which 
are  somewhat  better  preserved,  contain  an  allusion  to  the 
screaming  and  lamenting  of  Nintu  and  Inanna  which  we 
likewise  find  in  almost  identical  words  in  the  deluge  story  of 
the  Gilgames  epic.2  It  will,  however,  be  observed  that  in  our 
text  the  two  goddesses  are  mentioned  in  reverse  order,  so  that 

1  Cf .  Radau,  BE  XXIX  i,  Nos.  2,  310:  i-tur-tur-ri  su-luh  lu  li-bi-in-(s)a,  "canals  (?)  and 
(?)  ponds?  a  man  had  not  made."  (For  the  negation  li  in  this  passage  see  my  forthcoming 
paper  "Die  Negation  li  im  Sumerischen"  in  OLZ).  The  meaning  "pond"  or  "lake"  would  very 
well  suit  the  passage  CH  Col.  i6e2i:  mu-ub-bi-ib  su-luh  e-ab-zu  "who  made  shine  the  (sacred) 
lake  of  E-abzu."  Ungnad's  translation  "Allerheiligstes"  is  out  of  question. 

2Gilg.  Ep.  Xlin,  us- 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  47 

the  expression  "her  people"  refers  to  Inanna,  not  to  Nintu, 
a  fact  from  which  it  might  be  concluded  that  Inanna  or  IStar 
likewise  was  credited  with  the  creation  of  mankind;1  hut  it 
seems  to  me  that  the  names  of  the  two  goddesses  have  simply 
been  erroneously  interchanged,  the  version  of  the  Gilgames 
epic  probably  representing  the  better  text. 

In  the  latter  version,  furthermore,  the  passage  under 
discussion  occurs  at  the  point  where  the  actual  beginning  of 
the  flood  is  related,  whereas  in  our  text  it  evidently  follows 
immediately  the  resolution  of  the  gods  to  destroy  mankind. 
Whether  it  is  here  or  in  the  Gilgames  epic  that  the  passage 
appears  in  its  original  place,  depends  entirely  on  its  interpreta- 
tion. According  to  its  present  connection  in  the  version  of 
the  Gilgames  epic  it  might  seem  that  the  screaming  of  IStar  is 
an  expression  of  anguish,  the  psychological  moment  for  which 
indeed  would  be  at  the  first  outbreak  of  the  fury  of  the  storms. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  Nintu's  lament,  if  this  has  to  be  taken 
in  the  sense  that  the  goddess  begins  to  repent  of  her  former 
ill-will  against  mankind,  an  interpretation  which  indeed  we 
find  in  the  direct  quotation  of  her  speech  in  the  Gilgames  epic. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  in  the  lines  Gilg.  Ep.  XI  163-170,  which 
have  evidently  been  taken  from  another  version,  Belit-ili,  after 
Utnapistim's  salvation,  attributes  all  responsibility  for  the 
destruction  of  the  human  race  to  Enlil,  a  circumstance  which 
seems  to  suggest  that  in  the  council  of  the  gods  she  had  opposed 
Enlil's  proposal  to  destroy  the  human  race,  and  from  'this 
point  of  view  the  lament  over  the  destruction  of  "her  people" 
might  very  well  be  expected  immediately  after  the  final  decision 
of  the  gods  had  been  made.  Whatever  the  original  interpreta- 
tion of  the  lament  may  have  been,  at  any  rate  the  different 
placing  of  the  passage  is  again  an  indication  of  different  ver- 
sions in  the  story  of  the  deluge. 

In  the  version  contained  in  the  GilgameS  epic,  the  lines 
under  discussion  are  followed  by  a  lament  of  Belit-ili  in  direct 
quotation.  The  fact  that  the  latter  is  not  found  in  our  text, 

1  Cf.  Craig,  Religious  Texts  I,  15  Obv.,0. 


48  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

clearly  shows  that  it  is  taken  from  a  different  version,  a  con- 
clusion which  likewise  may  be  drawn  from  the  fact  that  the 
direct  quotation  refers  to  Belit-ili's  lament  only,  and  not  also, 
as  we  should  expect,  to  Istar's  screaming. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  our  text,  especially  at  this  point, 
refers  to  the  various  incidents  of  the  narrative  in  a  rather  short 
and  merely  allusive  style.  This  is  especially  evident  from  the 
following  line,  according  to  which  Enki  secretly  conceives  a 
plan  the  contents  of  which  is  not  betrayed  to  the  reader, 
although  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  devises  a  means  to 
frustrate  the  plan  of  the  gods.  •  What  the  following  lines  allude 
to,  however,  it  is  impossible  to  say,  as  the  ends  of  the  lines  are 
broken,  and  no  other  source  gives  us  information  concerning 
incidents  at  this  juncture  of  the  narrative. 

In  1.  20  Zi-u-GID-du,  the  hero  of  the  deluge,  is  introduced: 
The  meaning  of  his  name  is  evidently  "who  made  life  long 
of  days."1  It  will  be  observed  that  this  name  alludes  to 
life  or  to  the  soul  (zi  =  napistum)  just  as  does  the  Semitic 
name  Ut(a)-napistim  which  the  hero  of  the  known  deluge  story 
bears;  but  so  far  as  we  can  judge  at  the  present  time,  there 
seems  to  be  no  correspondence  between  the  other  elements  of 
the  two  names.  Our  zi-u-GID-du  is,  of  course,  identical  with 
the  zi-SU-da  who  is  mentioned  in  CT  18,  3O9a  and  rendered 
ut-na-PAB-HAL-te,  /'.  e.,  ut-na-£*5-te,2  in  the  Semitic  column, 
for  we  find  him  there  between  Gilgames  and  Engidu,  evidently 
on  account  of  the  connection  between  the  hero  of  the  deluge 
story  and  the  Gilgames  legend.  It  will  be  noticed  that  in  the 
last  mentioned  form  of  the  name  the  u  has  been  dropped  or 
rather  contracted  with  the  preceding  i,  that  instead  of  the  simple 
sign  siru,  we  have  the  sign  sirgunu,  and  lastly  that  the  final 
u  has  become  an  a,  which  probably  gives  the  name  a  passive 
meaning:  "Who  has  been  lengthened  in  life,"  i.  e.,  "who  has 

1  If  this  explanation  is  correct  u-G  I  Ddu  would  be  a  compound  participle  "time  lengthening," 
which,  together  with  the  prefixed  object  zi,  again  would   form   a   new   compound   participle 
zi-u-GIDdu  (in  Semitic  murrik  urn  balati).    Cf.  the  similar  formation  ti-u-SO-du  in  BE  XXIX  i, 

COl.    Il3,  13- 

2  Perhaps  ut-na-pa-d*-te? 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  49 

gained  long  life  (for  himself)."  Which  of  the  two  names  may 
represent  the  older  form  it  is  impossible  to  say,  both  perhaps 
being  due  to  an  artificial  etymology  by  which  it  was  attempted 
to  establish  a  connection  between  the  name  and  the  experiences 
of  the  hero  of  the  deluge  story. 

The  reading  of  the  signs  G1D  and  SU  in  the  two  forms  of 
the  name  presents  some  difficulties.  On  account  of  the  u  at  the 
end  of  the  sign  group  GID-du  one  might  expect  that  the  first 
of  the  two  signs  represents  a  value  containing  an  u,  and  since 
we  find  the  sign  SU  in  the  other  form  of  the  name,  as  well  as  in 
the  phrases  ti-u-SU-du,  BE  XXIX  i,  Col.  i,3, 14,  bal-Q-bi-SU- 
SU-du,  HOT  74,  Col.  215,  nam-ti-la-ni  he-SU  Gudea,  Statue  A, 
Col.  4!,  nam-ti  ib-SU-du,  AMAR-Sin,  Statue  B,  Rev.  12,  and  as 
we  doubtless  have  to  read  u-mu  he-su-su-u  in  Warad-Sin,  Stone 
tablet,  Rev.  21,  it  would  be  very  tempting  to  read  our  name 
zi-u-su-du.1  But  the  sign  G1D  on  our  tablet  seems  to  be  quite 
certain,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  enlarged  photographic  reproduc- 
tion of  the  five  passages  where  it  occurs,  and  unless  the  scribe 
has  made  a  mistake  in  all  these  passages,  the  only  value  that 
could  be  taken  into  account,  as  far  as  we  know  at  present, 
would  be  gid  =  araku.  Moreover,  it  will  be  remembered  that 
both  BU  and  SU  have  the  meaning  urruku  "to  lengthen," 
"to  make  long;"  cf.  ana  ittisu  i  Col.  3: 

53"55in-gl"ldgid         is-su-uh,  is-du-ud,  ur-ri-ik 
5fin-bu-ubu  ib-bu-uh 

57in-SO  ur-ri-ik; 

gi§ma-gid-da  a-rik-tum,  Br  7512;  and  gis^-^^SU  |  ar-rak 
.  .  .  . ,  Scheil,  ZA  IX  p.  220,  Obv.25.  According  to  the  passage  last  . 
quoted  SU  had  the  value  gi-di,  and  if  this  value  be  certain,2  we 
might  assume  that  in  the  passages  quoted  above  we  have  perhaps 
to  read  gid-du  instead  of  su-du,  etc.,  the  root  of  the  word  then 
being  something  like  gidu.  In  support  of  this  assumption  it  may 

1  The  same  was  suggested  to  me  by  Prof.  Zimmern  in  a  letter  in  which  he  called  my  atten- 
tion to  the  above-mentioned  passage  CT  18,  309,. 

2  Perhaps  zi?-di  (for  su-du)?     Cf.  I.  1 5  GlS  *( ^"'"'SU-SO. 


50  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

perhaps  be  said  that  su-u-da  means  ruqu  "distant,"  "remote" (cf., 
u-su-u-da-su  =  a-na  u-mi  ru-qu-ti  4  R  9  34a)  and  that,  therefore, 
it  would  be  likely  that  SUD  in  the  meaning  "to  be  long,"  etc., 
would  have  a  different  value.1  Nevertheless,  with  our  present 
material  it  is  impossible  definitely  to  decide  this  question. 

Quite  in  accordance  with  Berosus'  tradition  that  Xisuthros 
was  one  of  the  prediluvian  rulers,  throughout  our  text,  with 
only  a  few  exceptions,  Ziugiddu  is  referred  to  as  king;  but  at 
the  same  time  he  occupies  a  priestly  office,  namely,  that  of  the 
pasisu  to  some  god,  whose  name  is  broken  off.  This  is  very 
unfortunate,  for  the  god's  name  would  probably  have  given 
us  a  clue  as  to  the  city  in  which  the  deluge  story  was  localized 
by  our  text. 

Line  21  seems  to  refer  to  a  famous  work  which  the  Baby- 
lonians ascribed  to  Ziugiddu.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the 
AN-SAG  which  he  built,  is  called  gur-gur,'  "huge,"  the  term 
also  used  to  describe  the  boat  by  which  Ziugiddu  saved  himself, 
which  according  to  Berosus  measured  5  stadia  in  length  and 
2  stadia  in  width.  The  idea  that  whatever  man  in  those  old 
days  made  was  of  enormous  dimensions,  is,  of  course,  closely 
connected  with  the  belief  in  the  enormously  long  lives  of  men 
in  those  days,  and  likewise,  no  doubt,  man  himself  will  have 
been  fancied  by  the  Babylonians  then  to  have  been  of  a  much 
higher  stature  than  at  present.  Possibly  the  AN-SAG  which 
Ziugiddu  built  or  made  was  some  well-known  natural  or  artificial 
landmark  which  excited  the  curiosity  and  fancy  of  the  Baby- 
lonians. 

Of  especial  interest  for  us  are  the  lines  22  if,  because  they 
represent  Ziugiddu  as  a  pious  man,  a  feature  which  is  not  found 
in  the  Babylonian  versions  already  known,  but  which  has  its 
counterpart  in  the  Biblical  statement  that  Noah  was  a  just 
and  pious  man  in  his  time,  Genesis  619;  j^ 

1  In  this  case  the  value  su(d)  in  he-su-su-u  (above  quoted)  and  in  the  rather  uncertain 

passage   u-nam-ti-Ia-ka-na-SO-C-RI?.DA.BI.O-me-na-sa[-sa ]     =     mu-ur-rik   u-mi   ba-la- 

di-su  mu-Sak-sid  ir-n[i-it-ti ],  4  R  9s4a>  would  have  to  be  attributed  to  a  confusion  of 

the  two  values,  a  confusion  which  might  very  well  have  been  caused  by  the  similarity  of  the 
Semitic  equivalents  of  in-su(-u)  and  in-gid,  namely  urtq  and  urrik. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  51 

The  exact  meaning  and  especially  the  grammatical  con- 
struction of  the  last  two  lines  of  Column  3  is  not  clear  to  me. 
The  "bringing  forth"  of  "dreams  (or  a  dream)  that  had  not 
existed  before(?),"  and  the  invoking  or  conjuring  by  the  name 
of  Heaven  and  Earth  might  still  be  part  of  the  description  of 
Ziugiddu's  doings,  1.  24  perhaps  representing  him  as  the  first 
man  who  tried  to  find  out  the  will  of  the  gods  by  means  of 
dreams.  On  the  other  hand,  we  might  expect  that  these  dreams 
had  something  to  do  with  the  following  revelation  of  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  gods,  that  is,  that  they  were  the  means  by  which 
Ziugiddu  gained  knowledge  of  the  impending  destruction  of 
mankind.  That  the  story,  at  least  in  some  versions,  was  indeed 
told  in  this  way,  we  see  clearly  from  11.  195  and  196  of  the  account 
in  the  Gilgames  epic,  according  to  which  Ea  protests  that  he 
has  not-  communicated  the  secret  of  the  gods  to  Atrahasis,  but 
has  only  made  him  see  dreams,  so  that  he  "heard"  the  decision 
of  the  gods.1  Moreover,  in  the  account  of  Berosus  it  is  expressly 
stated  that  Kronos,  /'.  e.,  Ea,  appeared  to  Xisuthros  in  a  dream 
and  informed  him  that  mankind  would  perish  by  a  flood.2  As 
far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  preserved  text  of  our  tablet,  how- 
ever, there  seems  to  be  no  logical  connection  between  the  dreams 
mentioned  in  1.  24  and  the  communication  of  the  plan  of  the 
gods  in  Column  4. 

1  195a-na-ku  ul  ap-ta-a  pi-riS-ti  ilipl  rabutipl  19eat-ra-ha-sis  Su-na-ta  u-5ab-ri-§um-ma  pi-ris-ti 
ilipl  is-me. 

2  In  the  account  of  the  deluge  story  in  the  eleventh  tablet  of  the  GilgameS  epic  there  have 
been  worked  together  at  this  point  three  different  versions  which  can  still  be  very  clearly  traced. 

In  the  first  Ea  himself  communicates  the  decision  of  the  gods  directly  to  Ut-napi5tim  (II. 
23-47),  ar>d  wnen  later  taken  to  account  by  Enlil,  boldly  justifies  his  course  by  the  argument 
that  it  is  unreasonable  to  destroy  mankind  altogether,  instead  of  simply  punishing  them  with 
all  sorts  of  plagues  and  thus  causing  them  to  desist  from  their  evil  ways  (II.  180-194).  This 
argument  appeals  to  Enlil  and  he  becomes  reconciled  to  the  fact  that  Ut-napi5tim  is  saved. 

In  the  second  version  Ea  is  afraid  to  act  directly  against  the  will  of  Enlil.  and  perhaps  against 
his  own  promise,  not  to  divulge  to  mankind  the  contents  of  the  gods'  decision.  He  therefore 
sends  a  dream  to  Atrahasis,  "the  very  wise  (or  clever)  one,"  and  the  latter,  on  account  of  his 
cleverness,  guesses  the  impending  peril.  In  this  version  Ea  later  justifies  himself  by  saying 
that  he  has  spoken  to  no  man  regarding  the  plan  of  the  gods,  but  that  "the  very  wise  one"  guessed 
the  secret  from  the  dream  (11.  195,  196).  Note  that  in  this  version  the  hero  of  the  deluge  is  not 


52  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

COLUMN  4 

The  meaning  of  the  first  line  of  Column  4,  which  is  the 
immediate  continuation  of  the  last  line  of  Column  3,  is  not  clear 
on  account  of  its  broken  condition;  at  the  end  of  the  preserved 
part  of  the  line  a  wall  or  building  (IZ?-SlG)  seems  to  be  men- 
tioned, which  probably  is  identical  with  the  wall  (iz-zi)  men- 
tioned in  the  following  lines.  The  situation  in  11.  2  and  3  is 
apparently  this,  that  Ziugiddu,  while  standing  beside  this  wall, 
hears  a  voice,  which  utters  the  words  contained  in  lines  31?.  It 
will,  however,  be  observed  that  the  god  by  whom  Ziugiddu  is 
warned  does  not  address  his  words  to  the  wall,  as  he  does 
according  to  11.  20  and  22  of  the  eleventh  tablet  of  the  Gilgames 
epic,  but  to  Ziugiddu  himself,  the  wall  being  simply  the  place 
where  the  revelation  is  made.  This  entirely  agrees  with  the 
account  in  the  main  version1  of  the  story  in  the  Gilgames  epic 
according  to  which  the  god  Ea  addresses  Ut-napistim  directly. 
However,  that  also  in  one  of  the  versions  upon  which  our  own 
text  is  based  the  wall  originally  played  a  more  important  part, 
seems  to  follow  from  the  emphasis  laid  upon  it.  It  may  per- 
haps be  concluded  that  in  a  certain  Babylonian  sanctuary  a 
sacred  wall  figured  as  a  means  of  ascertaining  future  events, 
and  possibly  there  existed  the  belief  that  this  wall  inspired 
especially  significant  dreams  in  those  who  slept  near  it. 

For  numun-nam-lu-qal,  "seed  of  mankind,"  in  1.  8,  compare 
CT  13,  352ida-ru-ru  numun-"(  =  nam-lu-qal-lu)  an-da(slc)  bi-in- 
mu  =  d"(  =  a-ru-ru)  zi-ir  a-me-lu-ti  it-ti-su  ib-ta-nu. 

called  Ut(a)-napistim,  but  Atra-hasis.  In  Berosus'  account  that  Kronos,  i.  e.,  Ea,  himself, 
appeared  to  Xisuthros,  this  original  significance  of  the  dream  has  already  been  obliterated. 

In  the  third  version  Nin-igi-azag,  as  Ea  is  called  in  this  account,  relates  the  plan,  for  the  same 
reason  as  in  the  second  version,  to  a  wall  (11.  19-22),  and  Ut-napistim  thus  becomes  aware  of  it. 
Here  Nin-igi-azag  must  therefore,  when  taken  to  account  by  Enlil,  have  defended  himself  on  the 
ground  that  he  had  not  told  any  man,  but  a  wall,  and  that  thus  Xisuthros  had  heard  it.  It 
will  be  observed  that  in  1.  196  the  words  piristi  ill  isme,  are  rather  strange  in  connection  with  a 
dream;  we  would  expect  that  "the  very  wise  one"  guesses  what  is  meant  by  the  dream;  here 
evidently  we  have  a  trace  of  the  third  version,  according  to  which  Utnapistim  hears  what  is  said 
to  the  wall.  Did  there  perhaps  exist  a  tale,  according  to  which  the  wall  in  some  miraculous 
way  passed  the  secret  of  the  gods  on  to  Ut-napistim?  This  might  perhaps  have  been  an  allu- 
sion to  the  phenomenon  of  the  echo. 

1  At  least  the  main  version  of  the  story  at  this  point. 


A.  POEBEL— CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  53 

Buhrum  in  bu-uh-ru|-um  dingir-ri-ne],  "assembly  of  the 
gods,"  is  the  Semitic  word  puhrum;  at  the  time  of  Hammurabi, 
and  no  doubt  some  time  before  him,  pu^rum  was  the  common 
designation  for  the  city  council  which  was  entrusted  with  the 
political  administration  of  the  city  as  well  as  with  the  rendering 
of  judgment.  For  the  latter  cf.,  e.  g.,  BE  VI  2  No.  10,  accord- 
ing to  which  King  Hammurabi  refers  a  legal  case  to  the  bu-uh- 
ru-um  nibrukl;  it  will  be  observed  that  this  text  likewise,  al- 
though written  in  Sumerian,  uses  the  Semitic  word  rather  than 
the  corresponding  Sumerian  ukkin,  evidently  because  puhrum 
was  at  that  time  the  technical  term  for  the  city  council.  That 
the  word  in  our  text  is  also  applied  to  the  assembly  of  the  gods, 
is  a  good  example  of  the  tendency  to  model  everything  relating 
to  the  gods  after  human  affairs :  like  men  the  gods  form  an 
organized  community.  This  parallelism  is  even  more  evident 
from  the  fact  that  the  functions  of  the  assembly  of  the  gods 
are  described  in  the  same  technical  terms  as  those  of  the  human 
city  council;  e.  g.,  di-til-la,  in  1.  9,  is  the  common  term  for  the 
final  decision  of  a  court  of  justice  at  the  time  of  the  kingdom 
of  Ur;  cf. 'also  Enuma  elis  VI  145u-si-bu-ma  ina  puhri-su-nu 

i-nam-bu[-u ],  "they  sat  down  (for  a  session),"  etc., 

where  the  technical  term  asabu,  "to  sit,"  "to  be  in  session," 
is  used.  For  other  occurrences  of  puhrum  see,  e.  g.,  CT  13,  341, 

e-nu-ma    ilipl    i-na     bu-uh-ri-su-nu    ib-nu-u    [ ],    etc. 

However,  it  will  be  observed  that  the  idea  of  the  assembly  of 
the  gods  becomes  prominent  only  in  rather  late  inscriptions; 
if  this  is  not  merely  accidental,  it  might  perhaps  be  taken  as 
an  indication  of  a  difference  in  organization  between  Sumerian 
and  Semitic  communities,  at  least  at  the  time  when  the  two 
races  were  still  opposed  to  each  other.  Originally,  of  course, 
the  word  puhrum,  "assembly,"  must  have  implied  that  the 
whole  community  took  part  in  the  deliberations,  and  this  may 
very  well  have  been  the  practice  among  the  Semites,  while  in 
the  Sumerian  cities  there  seems  to  have  prevailed  a  more  feudal 
organization  under  an  hereditary  isakku  who  at  the  same  time 
often  occupied  a  hierocratical  position.  Nevertheless,  at  the 


54  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

time  of  the  first  dynasty  the  puhrum  had  already  become  a 
select  patrician  council,  for,  as  the  letters  of  Hammurabi  and 
his  successors  show,  it  consists  of  the  so-called  judges  with  a 
bel  teretim,  or  whatever  the  designation  of  this  official  was,  at 
their  head.  It  is  evidently  after  this  patrician  body  that  the 
assembly  of  the  gods  has  been  modeled. 

COLUMN  5 

The  missing  portion  of  Column  4  must  have  contained  the 
account  of  the  construction  of  Ziug/Wdu's  boat.  The  first  lines 
of  Column  5  already  depict  the  flood.  The  repetition  of  im-hul 
in  1.  i  expresses  the  idea  "all;"  du-a-bi,  "they  all,"  is  therefore 
a  pleonasm.  For  im-hul  im-hul  .  .  .  ni-lah-gi-es,  "all  the  winds 
...  went,"  i.  e.,  "blew,"  1.  i,  and  u-y-am  ge-y-am  a-ma-ru 
kalam-ma  ba-ur,  "seven  days  and  seven  nights  the  rainstorm 
struck  the  land,"  11.  3  and  4,  compare  Gilg.  Ep.  XI  1286  ur-ri  u 
mu-sa-a-ti  129il-lak  sa-a-ru  a-bu-bu  me-hu-u  i-sap-pan  mata.1 
The  principal  destructive  force,  however,  is  not  the  im-hul,  "the 
windstorm,"  but  the  a-ma-ru,  "the  rainstorm,"  "rain  flood," 
"cloud  burst,"  which  therefore  in  the  summary  in  11.  3  and  4  is 
mentioned  alone,  the  imhullu  being  mentioned  only  because  a 
thunder-storm  is  almost  invariably  preceded  and  accompanied 
by  a  windstorm.  The  same  two  destructive  forces  we  find  in 
the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic  designated  as  saru  and  abubu, 
mehu  in  11.  128  and  130  being  simply  a  variant  of  the  latter,  as 
follows  from  their  reversed  sequence  in  the  two  lines;  one  of 
the  sources  of  this  account  evidently  used  the  word  abubu, 
another  the  word  mehu  for  the  destructive  rainstorm.2  Neither 
the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic  nor  our  own  text  speaks  of  an 

1  For  the  verb  ur  (Qru)  in  ba-an-da-ab-ur-ur,  1.  2,  and  kalam-ma  ba-ur-ra-ta,  1.  4,  as  char- 
acteristic of  the  activity  of  the  rainstorm  or  rain  demon,  compare,  e.  g.,  Hrozny,  Ninrag,  p.  8, 
below:  lugal  a-ma-uru  ba-ur-ta?  =  be-lum  a-bu-ba-nis  ib-ta-a',  "the  lord  like  a   deluge  demon 
rages;"  CT  12,  50,  Obv.  2s  ur-ur  |  sa-ba-tu  sa  •,,(  =  a-bu-bi),  and  especially  5  R  4254c  ur-ur  |  sa- 
pa-nu,  which  latter  verb  is  used  in  the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic. 

2  For  another  mechanical  juxtaposition  of  two  variants  see  Gilg.   Ep.   XI   nnin-igi-azag 
e-a,  and  142sadu-u  §adani-sir. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  55 

inundation  by  a  rising  sea;  in  this  both  of  the  Babylonian 
accounts  agree  with  the  Biblical  Jehoistic  version  of  the  flood 
story  which  knows  only  of  a  rain  that  lasted  forty  days  and 
forty  nights,  in  contradistinction  to  the  Priestly  Code  according 
to  which  Elohim  flooded  the  earth  from  below  and  above  by 
opening  the  fountains  of  the  great  ocean  and  the  windows  of 
Heaven. 

According  to  our  text  the  rainstorm  lasted  fully  seven  days 
and  seven  nights,  11.  3  and  4,  while  according  to  the  account  in 
the  Gilgames  epic  its  duration  was  only  six  days  and  nights,  the 
rain  ceasing  at  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  day.1  Nevertheless 
this  variation  is  hardly  of  any  importance  when  compared  with 
the  forty  days  of  rain  in  the  Jehoistic  version  and  the  1 50  days 
during  which  the  flood  continued  to  rise  according  to  the 
Priestly  Code. 

For  bul-bul  =  nasu,  "to  move"  (intransitive),  in  1.  5,  see 
4  R  28,  2  lodiskur  sur-ra-na  ki  si(?)-in-ga-bul-bul  =  dadad  ina  e-zi- 
zi-su  ir-si-tum  i-na-as-su,  and  Hrozny,  Ninrag  2  and  3  Rev.3  gir- 
gin-na-zu-su  an-ki  a(?)-bul-bul  =  ina  a-la-ki-ka  samu-u  u 
irsi-tim  i-nu-us-su;  in  these  passages  nasu,  "to  move,"  is  used 
as  a  synonym  of  "to  shake,"  "to  tremble;"  but  that  it  can 
denote  the  movement  of  a  ship  upon  or  over  the  water,  is  shown 
by  Gilg.  Ep.  XII42  sadu-u  dani-sir  I9Uelippu  is-bat-ma  a-na 
na-a-si  ul  id-din,  "the  mountain  (var.  Mount  Nisir)  caught  the 
ship  and  did  not  allow  it  to  move."  This  verb  nasum  (£'13)  is, 
of  course,  against  Delitzsch,  HW,  p.  454,  identical  with  the  verb 
nuasu  which  according  to  2  R  3550ef  is  a  synonym  of  alaku.2 

The  text  has  clearly  im-hul-bul-bul-a-ta;  if  this  is  correct 
we  might  either  assume  that  bul-bul-a  is  a  transitive  verbal 


JThis  seventh  day  is  designated  as  u-mu  in  1.  130  because  the  whole  day,  including  the  night, 
is  meant;  "day"  in  contradistinction  to  night  is  urru,  which  we  therefore  find  in  I.  128:  7  ur-ri 
u  mu-Sa-a-ti. 

2  Judging  from  the  occurrence  of  tuaru  and  tarum,  nuSSu  would  be  a  characteristically 
Assyrian  form;  note,  e.  g.,  that  the  Assyrian  legal  documents  usually  use  the  phrase  tu-a-ru 
di-e-nu  da-ba-a-bu  la-as-Su,  whereas  in  Babylonian  tablets  we  find  ta-a-ri  u  da-ba-bi  ia-a-nu. 
Tuaru  is,  of  course,  the  infinitive  form  kasadum,  not  as  Delitzsch,  HWB  p.  703,  states,  qutalu 
formation. 


VOL. IV. 


56  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

form  without  prefix,  having  im-hul  as  subject,1  or  im-hul-bul- 
bul-a  is  a  compound  passive  participle,  "wind  driven,"  here 
used  instead  of  a  definite  verbal  form.  But  it  would  not  be 
impossible,  though  it  is  not  very  likely,  that  the  original  text 
read  im-si-zfc-bul-bul  "(the  boat)  moved  (intransitive)  (over 
the  waters)."2 

The  post-positive  ta,  added  to  the  relative  a  is  here  as 
elsewhere  used  as  conjunction  "since,"  "after;"  it  corresponds 
exactly  to  istu  with  relative  clause  in  Semitic  Babylonian. 
Another  example  of  this  construction  of  ta  is  12a-ga-dekl  nam- 
lugal  su-ba-ab-ti-a-ta  "after  Agade  had  taken  the  kingdom," 
Stele  from  Telloh,  RS  1897,  pp.  166  f,  col.  4.  Compare  also 
the  compounded  conjunction  egir — ta  with  relative  clause 
in  degir  dsin-a-bu-su  ba-us-a-ta  "after  Sinabusu  had  died," 
BE  VI  2,  No.  42. 

The  prominence  which  the  god  Samas  is  given  in  the  next 
lines  is  quite  natural,  since  during  the  seven  days  of  the  rain- 
storm the  world  was  covered  by  darkness,  and,  moreover,  the 
sun-god,  whose  light  shines  everywhere,  would  be  the  first  to 
perceive  the  boat,  and  to  be  himself  perceived  by  Ziugiddu. 
For  this  reason  Ziugiddu  prays  first  to  him  (1.  10),  even  before 
Anu  and  Enlil,  and  we  may  conclude  that  Samas,  taking  pity 
on  him,  aids  him  with  his  counsel  to  placate  the  other  gods  and 
especially  Enlil. 

In  the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic  the  adoration  scene 
before  the  god  Samas  has  entirely  lost  its  original  color;  for 
when  in  this  version  Ut-napistim  opens  a  nappasum,  it  is  not 
the  sun-god  that  enters  the  boat  by  his  rays,  but  the  "daylight," 
urru  (written  u-da),  falling  on  Ut-napistim's  cheek.-'5  Yet  in 

1  Similar  incomplete  verbal  forms  are  not  infrequently  found  in  late  and  corrupt  Sumerian 
texts;   cf.,  e.  g.,  an-ki-a  (slc)bul-bul  in  the  passage  quoted  above.     But  in  our  case  this  may  be 
a  correct  or  at  least  permitted  construction,  since  the  prefix  would  be  clear  from  the  preceding 
verbal  form  ba-ur-ra-ta;   cf.  also  u-ma-ma  in  the  next  line.     Moreover,  such  incomplete  verbal 
forms  may  perhaps  be  allowed  by  poetic  license. 

2  Cf .  also  the  above  quoted  passage  4R  28,  2i0  in  which  bul-bul  is  likewise  connected  with 
the  element  si(?). 

3  Gilg.  Ep.  XI  136ap-ti  nap-pa-sa-am-tna  urru  im-ta-qut  eli  dur-ap-pi-ia  137uk-tam-mi-is-ma 
at-ta-sab  a-bak-ki.     The  words  im-ta-qut  eli  dur-ap-pi-a,  by  the  way,  are  perhaps  influenced  by 
1.  138  eli  dflr-ap-pi-a  il-Ia-ka  di-ma-a-a. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  57 

1.  137  we  still  find  an  indication  of  the  original  form  of  the  story 
in  the  feature  that  Ut-napiStim  throws  himself  down,  uk-tam- 
mi-is,  which  corresponds  to  our  KA-ki-su-ub-ba-tum,  and, 
moreover,  does  not  fit  very  well  the  immediately  following 
at-ta-sab,  "I  was  sitting."  The  reason  for  this  alteration  in 
the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic  is  obvious;  for  if  Sama§  noticed 
the  boat,  he  (and  therefore  the  other  gods)  would  at  once  be 
aware  of  Utnapistim's  escape,  which  would  not  be  in  harmony 
with  the  feature  later  mentioned  that  the  gods  are  drawn  to 
the  ship  by  the  pleasant  smell  of  the  offerings;  nor  would  there 
be  time  enough  left  for  the  sending  out  of  the  birds,  which 
according  to  11.  140-146  takes  place  fully  seven  days  later. 
For  the  same  reason,  on  the  other  hand,  the  feature  of  the  sending 
out  of  the  birds  cannot  have  existed  in  our  own  text,  as,  more- 
over, is  clearly  shown  by  the  fact  that  immediately  after  the 
adoration  before  Samas,  or  more  likely,  in  the  intention  of  the 
author,  at  the  same  time,  Ziugiddu  offers  up  his  sacrifices, 
which  latter  action  in  the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic  follows 
the  bird  scene. 

So  far  as  we  can  judge,  the  adoration  scene  and  the  offer- 
ing up  of  the  sacrifices  take  place,  according  to  our  text,  in  the 
boat  itself,  which  evidently  is  supposed  to  be  still  floating  on 
the  waters.  No  doubt  this  was  likewise  the  assumption  in 
one  of  the  versions  which  have  been  fused  into  the  present 
account  of  the  flood  in  the  Gilgames  epic,  for  according  to  11. 
198-200  Enlil,  after  his  anger  has  subsided,  with  no  plausible 
reason  boards  the  boat,  where  he  seizes  Ut-napistim  by  his 
hands  and  bestows  eternal  life  upon  him  and  his  wife.1  This, 
of  course,  is  not  quite  in  harmony  with  the  previous  statement, 

1  Gilg.  Ep.  X I  19si-lam-ma  denli!  a-na  lib-bi  1§uelippi  lwis-bat  ga-ti-ia-ma  ul-te-la-an-ni  ia-a-Si 
200u£-te-li  us-tak-mi-is  sin-nil-ti  ina  i-di-ia,  etc.  Ul-te-la-an-ni  and  u$-te-li  present  considerable 
difficulty;  a  translation  such  as  "he  led  me  out  (of  the  boat),"  or  Ungnad's  translation  "er  fiihrte 
mich  ans  Land,"  is  very  doubtful,  because  sulfl  has  the  meaning  "to  lead  out  of  something" 
only  in  cases  where  "to  lead  into  something"  is  expressed  by  Surudu;  Sfllu  on  the  contrary 
means  "to  take  aboard  (a  vessel);"  cf.,  ilamma,  1.  198.  It  would  therefore  seem  that  these 
verbs  are  either  taken  from  a  different  context  or  represent  an  attempt  to  harmonize  the 
statement  that  Enlil  goes  aboard  the  boat  with  the  previous  statement  that  Ut-napi5tim  has 
already  left  it  before  by  the  assumption  that  Enlil  leads  Ut-napiltim  back  to  the  ship. 


58  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

that  Ut-napistim  offered  up  his  sacrifices  on  the  peak  of  the 
mountain  where  the  boat  had  landed,  a  feature  which  is  evi- 
dently taken  from  a  different  version. 

The  boat  in  which  Ziugiddu  saves  himself  is  designated 
as  gisma-gur-gur.  The  same  word,  but  written  ma-gur-gur, 
is  used  in  the  fragment  of  the  Semitic  deluge  story  from  Nippur 
which  was  published  by  Prof.  Hilprecht.1  In  this  latter  form 
we  find  it  also  in  the  syllabary  K  4378,  etc.  (Col.  5,  1.  i5),2  where 
it  is  rendered  in  the  Semitic  column  SU-rum,  i.  e.,  magurgur- 
rum.  The  word  has,  of  course,  nothing  to  do  with  gl§ma-uru 
=  magurru,3  which  denotes  the  barges  of  the  gods;  as  our 
text  shows,  the  second  element  is  gur-gur(-ra)  =  kabbarum, 
"very  great,"4  g'5ma-gur-gur  therefore  corresponding  to  the 
glSelippu  ra-bi-tu  in  1.  6  of  the  fragment  just  quoted. 

The  element  ra  in  the  verbal  form  im-ma-ra-e,  1.  6,  is  prob-' 
ably  the  same  as  in  ba-ra-e  =  i-ta-si. 

There  can  hardly  be  any  doubt  that  the  sentence  in  1.  7 
relates  that  Ziugiddu  makes  an  opening  in  the  roof  or  in  one 
of  the  walls  of  the  boat,  through  which,  according  to  the  follow- 
ing lines,  the  rays  of  the  god  Samas  can  enter.  As  according 
to  Gilg.  Epic  Xlise  Ut-napistim  opens  a  nappasu,  we  may  con- 
clude that  KAF-BUR  in  our  text  has  the  same  meaning  and  is 
identical  with  the  KA-BAL  =  nappasu  in  5  R  39,  263;  42,134  which 
probably  is  a  mistake  of  the  copyist  for  KA-BUR.  From  the 
occurrence  of  nappasu  outside  the  deluge  story  it  would  appear 
that  its  meaning  is  simply  "hole"  and  the  verb  U  would  then 
evidently  be  bur(u)  =  palasu,  "to  make  a  hole."5  The  literal 
translation  of  1.  7  then  would  be:  Ziugiddu  dug  a  hole  (with, 
/'.  e.,  through)  the  boat.6 

1  BE  Ser.  D,  Vol.  V,  fasc.  i. 
1  Delitzsch,  AL3,  pp.  86-90. 
'This  is  assumed  by  Hilprecht,  BE  Ser.  D,  Vol.  V,  fasc.  i,  pp.  52-55. 

4  Cf.  Br.  10181,  1 02 1 1. 

5  PilSu  is  a  hole  which  is  dug  through  something,  e.  g.,  through  the  wall  of  a  house;   a  hole 
which  is  dug  in  something,  e.  g.,  in  the  ground,  is  hurru,  etc.     In  Sumerian  both  ideas  are  expressed 
by  0  =  bu-ru  =  pilsu,  palasu  and  hurru,  hararu. 

6  Or  perhaps:   "he  perforated  the  boat  with  a  hole." 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  59 

The  ending  en  in  ba-an-tu-ri-en  in  1.  8  is  perhaps  simply  a 
mistake. 

The  phrase  KA-ki'-su-ub— turn  means  literally,  "to  per- 
form the  kissing  of  the  ground,"  i.  e.,  "to  worship,"  "to  do 
homage  (before  somebody)"  and  finally,  "to  pray  humbly 
(before  a  deity)";  cf.  2  R  47  JefKA-ta-su-ub  ka-ra-bu,  "to 
worship,"  na-sa-qu,  "to  kiss,"  and  4  R  9  f  """ki-a  mu-un-su- 
ub-su-ub  =  qaq-qa-ru  u-na-sa-qu.  Outside  the  Erne-sal  texts 
the  stem  sub  is  usually  written  with  the  sign  KA  +  SU(?)2; 
cf.  sub-bi  =  ikribu,  "homage,"  "prayer";  sub-sub  =  Sukinnu, 
"to  humble  oneself  (before  somebody),"  "to  do  homage";  and 
especially  the  phrase  sub — turn,  "to  perform  the  proskynesis," 
and  "to  pray  (before  a  deity)":  1  22ninni  nin-a-ni  25mu-na- 
an-gin  26sub-mu-na-tum  (follows  direct  quotation),  Utu-hegal; 
2  29lugal-ba-g#-ra  mu-na-gin  sub  mu-na-tum,  Gud.  Cyl.  A,  etc. 
For  the  meaning  of  KA-ki-su-ub — turn,  cf.  also  Berosus' 
report  that  Xisuthros,  after  the  ship  had  landed,  disem- 
barked, and  TrposKvvrjo-avTa  rrjv  y^v  and  having  erected  an  altar, 
disappeared. 

With  gu  im-ma-ab-gaz-e  udu  im-ma-ab-sar-ri  in  1.  1 1 
compare  Gilg.  Ep.  XI  71.  .  .  .  ud-dib-bi-ih  alpepl  |  72as-gi-is 
[immere]pl.  Sar  is  here  evidently  synonym  of  gaz;  or  does 
it  have  its  usual  meaning,  "to  make  abundant?" 


COLUMN  6 

The  rest  of  Column  5,  now  missing,  may  have  dealt  with 
the  arrival  of  the  other  gods,  but  this  is  by  no  means  certain. 
In  the  opening  lines  of  Column  6  one  of  them3  seems  to  be 
speaking  to  Ziugiddu  and  his  companions,  advising  them  to 
invoke  Anu  and  Enlil  by  the  soul  of  Heaven  and  Earth  for  the 
accomplishment  of  some  purpose  which  is  not  clear  to  me.  The 


1  The  ki  is  quite  plain  in  510. 

1  KA+KU? 

3  Or  perhaps  still  Samas? 


60  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

form  ni-pa-de-en-ze-en  is  the  second  plural  of  the  future  tense 
of  the  active  theme  in-pa  (ni-pa)."1 

The  exact  meaning  of  the  following  line  which  again  con- 
tains the  word  nig-x,  and  its  connection  with  the  preceding  or 
the  following  are  not  quite  clear  to  me.  For  the  first  part  of  the 
line  compare  Col.  i15.  The  verbal  form  im-ma-ra-e-de  would 
correspond  to  Semitic  illi  (ilia),  "he  (or  it)  rises  up,"  "goes  up." 
Could  this  line  refer  to  the  rising  of  the  land  out  of  the  water, 
corresponding  to  i-te-la-a  na-gu-u,  Gilg.  Ep.  XI  140,  and  nig- 
x(-ki-ta?)  therefore  be  an  expression  for  land?  At  least  it 
would  seem  natural  that  Ziugiddu,  when  approaching  land, 
should  prostrate  himself,  according  to  the  following  line,  before 
Enlil,  the  lord  of  all  the  lands. 

As  in  the  version  of  the  Gilgames  epic,  so  here,  accord- 
ing to  11.  7-10,  Enlil2  bestows  eternal  life  upon  Ziugiddu.  Note 
in  both  cases  the  comparison  of  this  eternal  life  with  that  of 
the  gods:  dingir-dim,  Column  68;  ki-i  ilf1  na-si-ma,  Gilg.  Ep. 
XI  2O3.3  The  words  of  Enlil  are  apparently  spoken  while 
Ziugiddu  is  prostrated  before  him.  A  reflection  of  the  same 
situation  in  one  of  the  sources  of  the  account  in  the  Gilgames 
epic  may  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  according  to  1.  200  Enlil 
causes  the  wife  of  Ut-napistim  to  prostrate  herself  at  the  latter's 
side:  us-tak-mi-is  sin-nis-ti  ina  i-di-a;  note  that  the  verb 
kamasu  here  as  well  as  in  1.  137  (iktamis)  corresponds  to  KA- 
ki-su-ub — turn. 

In  the  account  of  the  deification  our  tablet  mentions  only 
Ziugiddu,  and  not  his  wife,  as  does  the  account  in  the  Gilgames 
epic.  But  even  there  it  can  plainly  be  seen  that  the  wife  of 
Utnapistim  was  mentioned  only  in  some  of  the  versions  upon 
which  this  account  is  based,  since  in  1.  199  Ut-napistim  alone 
is  referred  to,  while  his  wife  is  not  introduced  before  1.  200  and 
then  only  in  a  rather  awkward  manner;  and  furthermore, 

1  It  would  not  be  altogether  impossible,  however,  that  it  is  the  2  pi.  of  the  permansive  theme 
ni-pa,  and  then  might  mean  "you  have  been  invoked,"  "you  are  invoked." 

1  More  accurately  the  Anu  Enlil. 

3  In  the  Semitic  text  the  plural  is  used  because  the  comparison  refers  to  Ut-napistim  and 
his  wife. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  61 

although  the  following  lines  201-203  refer  to  Ut-napis'tim  and 
his  wife  in  the  plural,  the  closing  lines  of  the  poem  (11.  204, 
205)  again  return  to  the  singular,  referring  to  Ut-napistim 
alone.  Berosus'  account  of  the  deluge  bears  testimony  to  the 
existence  of  a  third  version  according  to  which  the  gods  bestow 
divinity  even  upon  Xisuthros'  daughter  and  the  steersman  of 
the  boat. 

The  last  section  of  the  preserved  portion  of  Column  6, 
beginning  with  1.  10,  evidently  corresponds  to  the  closing  lines 
of  the  account  in  the  Gilgames  epic  which  tell  us  that  the  gods 
took  Ut-napistim  to  a  distant  place  at  the  mouth  of  the  rivers, 
but  the  particulars  of  the  text  are  not  all  clear  at  the  present. 
Numun-nam-lu-qal-uru^-Cs)^),  "who  (or  which)  saved  the  seed 
of  mankind,"  might  be  a  by-name  of  Ziugiddu,  unless  it  is  the 
name  of  the  nig-x.2  Note  that  in  the  fragment  of  the  deluge 
story  published  by  Prof.  Hilprecht,  the  deluge  boat  is  given 
a  similar  name,  namely,  na-si-rat  na-pis-tim.3  Mu-un-ti-es, 
"they  caused  him  to  dwell,"  1.  12,  corresponds  to  us-te-si-bu-in- 
ni,  "they  caused  me  to  dwell,"  Gilg.  Ep.  XI,  1.  205. 

If  the  fourth  sign  in  line  12  is  identical  with  the  Assyrian 
signs  NI-TUK,4  the  place  to  which  the  gods  took  Ziugiddu 
after  eternal  life  had  been  bestowed  upon  him  would  be  the 
kur-tilmun-na  which  in  the  writing  kur-tilmunkl  occurs  also  in 
ASK  2 1 37  and  there  is  rendered  in  the  Semitic  interlinear 
translation  by  sadu  tjlmun,  "Mount  Tilmun."5  From  the 

1  The  sign  is  clearly  SES. 

2  Cf.  mu-nig-x-ma,  "the  name  of   the    nig-x;"    but  in  this  case  one  would  expect  a  verb 
"he  called  (the  name,  etc.)." 

3  Read  [glselippu]    si-i  lu  glsma-gur-gur-ma!    sum!-sa!    lu    na-si!-rat    na-pi5-tim.       "The 
same  ship  shall  be  a  magurgurru  (giant  boat)  and  its  name  shall  be  .'Which  saved  life.'" 

4  The  first  part  of  the  sign  is  rather  effaced,  but  it  seems  to  be  SAL;   the  second  part  is 
probably  tug,  but  it  might  be  kin,  or,  if  the  perpendicular  pressed  wedge  does  not  belong 
to  an  erasure,  KAB(TUG).     For  the  assumed  identity  of  the  sign  with  the  signs  NI-TUG  note 
that  in  157  Column  i2  it  has  the  form.£$b».(in  e-SAL-TUG-na,  a  temple  of  IStarat  Ur).    Com- 
pare also  that  the  archaic  sign  KAK+GIS,  "battle  mace,"  in  the  second  half  of  the  first  dynasty 
appears  as  SAL+GIS",  NIN  and  DAM!     On  the  other  hand,  there  is  a  sign  KAK+KAB;  cf., 
e.  g.,  BE.  VI,  2  No.  30,  seal. 

6  37PU-kur-NI-TUKkl-ka  sag-ma  a-ba-ni-in-[ ]    =    ^ina   bur-ti  Sa-di-i  dil-mun  qaq- 

qa-du  am-si.  "in  the  cistern  (or  pond)  of  Mount  Tilmun  I  washed  my  head." 


62  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

inscriptions  we  see  that  Tilmun  must  have  been  situated  in 
the  South  outside  of  Babylonia  proper.  It  is  usually  assumed 
that  it  was  situated  on  an  island  about  thirty  miles  from  the 
shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf1  which  in  those  times  extended  much 
further  north;  but  the  passage  from  which  this  conclusion  has 
been  drawn,2  states  merely  that  King  Uperi  of  Tilmun  had, 
like  a  fish,  made  for  himself,  at  that  distance  from  the  shore, 
a  lair  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,  which,  of  course,  proves  nothing 
for  the  exact  position  of  Tilmun,  since  it  is  not  stated  that 
Tilmun  itself  was  situated  in  the  sea.  Nor  does  the  fact  that 
the  inscription  found  by  M.  .Durand  on  the  Bahrein  Island 
Samak  contains  the  name  of  the  god  din-za-ag,  who  is  probably 
identical  with  the  god  den-zag  of  Tilmun,3  prove  that  this  island 
is  Tilmun.  From  Gudea,  Statue  G,  Col.  47.10,  which  mentions 
the  country  or  the  mountains  of  Tilmun  together  with  the 
countries  or  mountains  of  Magan,  Meluhha  and  Gubi  as  places 
which  furnished  wood  for  Gudea's  buildings  and  from  which 
Babylonia  could  be  reached  by  ship,  it  rather  follows  that 
Tilmun  was  an  extensive  mountainous  district,  probably 
situated  somewhere  on  the  shore  of  the  southern  section  of 
the  Persian  Gulf,  either  in  Oman  or,  what  is  more  likely,  in 
Persia.4 

According  to  the  deluge  story  in  the  Gilgames  epic  the 
gods  caused  the  deified  Ut-napistim  to  dwell  at  the  mouth  of 
the  rivers,  by  which  evidently  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  are 
meant.  This  conception,  of  course,  is  not  in  accordance  with 
the  localization  of  Ziugiddu's  abode  in  the  country  of  Tilmun, 
nor  with  the  idea  prevailing  in  the  other  portions  of  the  Gil- 
games  epic  that  Ut-napistim  lives  in  a  very  distant  land  and 
that  Gilgames  has  to  make  a  long  and  perilous  journey  over 
high  mountains  and  across  the  sea  before  he  arrives  there. 


1  Delitzsch,  Wo  lag  das  Paradies?     p.  178. 

2  Sargon,  Monol.  Col.  223-25. 

3  2  R  5466  =  CT  25,  35  Obv.20 

4  Jensen,  in  ZA  15,  p.  225  ff.  thinks  that  Tilmun  is  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf 
as  far  as  the  straits  of  Hormus,  comprising  also  the  province  Persis. 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  63 

There  existed  clearly  two  distinct  versions  concerning  Ut-napis'- 
tim's  dwelling  place;  in  the  closing  lines  of  the  present  deluge 
story  in  the  Gilgames  epic  they  have  been  harmonized  by  add- 
ing to  ina  pi  narati  the  words  ina  ruqi,  "in  the  distance,"  which 
originally  represented  a  variant  to  ina  pi  narati,  but  now  imply 
that  the  mouth  of  the  river  has  to  be  sought  at  a  distance  and 
not  on  the  southern  shore  of  Babylonia  itself. 

The  effaced  and  broken  signs  after  kur-dilmun-na  are 
perhaps  ki-dutu-e,  "a  place  in  the  East,"  which  would  very 
well  agree  with  a  localization  of  the  city  or  country  of  Tilmun 
on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf;  but  as  the  traces  of 
the  signs  are  not  clear  enough  it  is  safer  to  leave  this  question 
undecided. 

What  the  rest  of  Column  6  may  have  contained  it  is  impos- 
sible to  say. 


COLOPHON 

The  colophon  on  the  left  edge  of  the  tablet  is  unfortunately 
too  much  damaged  to  allow  any  definite  reading  at  the  present 
•except  of  the  name  zi-u-GID-du.  The  last  of  the  preserved 
.signs,  which  follows  this  name,  may  be  dam,  and  the  signs  at  the 

beginning  of  the  line  perhaps  an  den- If,  however,  the 

vertical  impression  at  the  beginning  of  the  line  was  intended  to 
form  part  of  a  cuneiform  character,  the  first  signs  might  very  well 

be  read  en  den ;  in  this  case  our  text  would  evidently  form 

the  introduction  to  an  incantation  rite,  which  would  indeed  be 
possible,  since  the  recital  of  traditions  relating  to  events  of  the 
earliest  times  was  believed  to  give  the  exorcist  supernatural 
power;  and,  moreover,  we  could  then  easily  account  for  the  fact 
that  such  unusual  stress  is  laid  on  the  invoking  of  the  name  and 
the  soul  of  Heaven  and  earth  in  the  course  of  the  narrative. 
But  as  the  reading  en  is  entirely  uncertain,  it  is  impossible,  at 
.the  present,  to  come  to  any  definite  conclusion. 


64  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

THE  POETIC  FORM  OF  THE  TEXT 

Like  all  the  other  known  accounts  of  the  creation  and  deluge 
in  cuneiform  script  our  new  text  is  a  poetical  composition,  as 
will  easily  be  seen  from  the  arrangement  of  the  lines,  from  the 
parallelism  and  especially  from  the  peculiar  repetition  of  cer- 
tain lines  with  only  a  slight  variation.  As  to  the  arrangement  of 
the  lines  note,  e.  g.,  the  distribution  of  certain  metrical  unities 
over  two  lines,  the  second  of  which  is  indented  and  not  ruled 
and  therefore  is  merely  the  continuation  of  the  first;  see 
1 3  4,  1 6,7,  i  i6,n,  etc.  Especially  instructive  examples  are  furnished 
by  lines  2n  and  22if,  which  are  almost  identical,  the  latter,  in 
fact,  being  merely  a  recapitulation  of  the  former;  for  while  in 
the  passage  first  mentioned  the  verse  is  placed  on  a  single  line, 
in  the  latter  it  occupies  one  of  the  double  lines  just  described. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  notice  that  certain  word-groups, 
by  the  use  of  blank  spaces  between  them,  are  made  to  fill  the 
whole  line,  which  is  the  more  significant,  as  many  of  these  lines 
represent  only  part  of  a  sentence.  We  may  take  as  an  example 
of  this  the  four  lines  53-6,  transliterated  in  the  following  with  the 
same  arrangement  of  the  word-groups  as  found  on  the  original : 

u-imin-am  ge-imin-  am 

a-ma-ru  kalam-ma  ba-ur-ra-  ta 

g'§ma-gur-gur  a-kal-la  im-hul-bul-bul-a-ta 

dutu  i-im-ma-ra-e  an-ki-a  u-ma-   ma 

It  will  be  noticed  that  each  of  these  lines  is  divided  into 
two  halves  by  the  use  of  a  blank  space,  and  that,  moreover, 
in  the  first  and  last  lines  these  halves  show  parallelism  in  form 
as  well  as  in  meaning.  On  the  other  hand,  the  blank  spaces 
which  we  notice  in  the  divisions  to  the  right,  are  not  due  to  any 
metrical  consideration,  but  simply  to  the  desire  of  the  scribe 
not  to  leave  a  blank  space  at  the  end  of  the  column.  A  good 
example  of  parallelism  between  two  complete  lines  is  found  in, 
68,9: 

ti  dingir-dim  mu-un-na-si-mu 

zi-dari  dingir-dim  mu-un-na-ab-e-de 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  65 

Another  phenomenon  similar  to  the  so-called  parallelism, 
but  nevertheless  quite  distinct  from  it,  is  the  repetition  of  cer- 
tain lines  in  a  somewhat  different  form;  as  a  rule,  the  second 
verse  is  slightly  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  an  element  more 
closely  defining  one  of  the  grammatical  units  of  the  preceding 
verse,  usually  the  first.  Cf.  lines  29i0: 

[gis -].  .  .-nam-lugal-la  an-ta-e-da-a-ba 

[...].  .-mah  gls.  .  .  .[.  .  .1-nam-lugal-la  an-ta-e-a-ba 

It  will  also  be  observed  that  this  peculiar  repetition  as 
well  as  some  of  the  parallelisms  produce  a  sound  effect  which 
in  some  way  may  be  compared  to  that  of  the  modern  rhyme, 
though,  of  course,  the  actual  resemblance  between  the  two 
phenomena  is  only  a  remote  one.  This  effect  is  very  well 
shown,  e.  g.,  by  lines  53-6  quoted  above;  note  here  the  corre- 
spondence of  imin-am  in  the  two  half  verses  in  1.  3,  and  of  a-ta 
in  the  two  following  verses,  examples  which  approach  very 
closely  to  actual  rhyme. 

The  poem  character  of  our  text  finally  shows  itself  in  the 
diction.  It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  our  text  does 
not  relate  the  various  incidents  of  the  story  in  the  quiet  and 
steady  progression  usually  found  in  historical  narrative,  but 
often  merely  alludes  to  some  striking  incident  and  without 
wasting  any  time  on  details  jumps  abruptly  to  some  other 
incident.  A  good  illustration  for  this  is  found  in  the  third 
column,  where- line  17'  merely  tells  us  that  Enki  field  counsel 
in  his  heart  without  betraying  what  the  subject  of  his  delibera- 
tions was.  Our  poem  evidently  belongs  to  that  class  of  historical 
poetry  which  was  not  intended  to  impart  new  historical  infor- 
mation, but  rather  to  review  historical  facts  with  which  the 
person  who  listened  to  the  poem  or  song  was  quite  familiar. 
In  these  features  our  poem  resembles  the  old  Hebrew  historical 
poetry  with  its  merely  allusive  style,  a  feature  which  is  very 
striking  in  the  so-called  Song  of  Deborah,  Judges  5,  when 
compared  with  the  simple  historical  narrative  in  the  fourth 
chapter. 


66  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

In  this  connection   I   should  like  to  call  attention  to  the 
comparatively  frequent   use  of  the  expression   u-bi-a  or  u-ba, 
"on  that  day,"  "at  that  time,"  which  is  found  in  315  :  u-bi'-a  dnin- 
t[u   ......  ]  dim  a-[  .......  ];    320  :  u-ba  zi-u-GID-du  lugal-am, 

and  the  same  again  in  610.  For  this  phrase,  which  directs  the 
attention  to  bygone  days  in  contradistinction  to  the  present, 
very  well  illustrates  the  purpose  just  described,  namely,  to 
make  historical  facts  pass  in  review  before  the  listener.  This 
use  of  u-ba,  by  the  way,  is  a  very  common  feature  of  historical 
poetry,  as  I  hope  to  show  more  at  length  at  some  other  time. 
Here,  however,  it  may  be  pointed  out  that  the  use  of  'az, 
"then,"  "at  that  time,"  in  old  Hebrew  poetry  forms  an  exact 
parallel  to  this  peculiarity  of  the  Babylonian;  for  in  the  Song 
of  Deborah,  e.  g.,  we  find  the  particle  used  no  less  than  five 

times  to  introduce  some  striking  incident:  58  D<H}7£pt  DPD  IX; 
5n  ni.T  Cy  0^156  TTT.  IN,  "at  that  time  the  people  of 
Jahweh  descended  to  the  gates;"  513  Qy  DT6  TQfr  TV  IN  ; 


5i9  JJtt?        0  IBDl  7N,  "at  that  time  the  kings  of  Canaan  did 
battle;"   and  522   DID"1?       IDn  1K>  "at   that   time  the  hoofs 


of  the  horses  pawed  the  ground."  From  this  as  well  as  from 
the  similarities  in  poetical  form  it  will  be  seen  that  there  existed 
a  very  close  relation  between  Israelitish  and  Babylonian  poetry. 
These  common  peculiarities,  however,  were  doubtless  not 
restricted  to  these  two  nations,  but  will  probably  be  found  to 
have  been  characteristic  of  the  poetry  of  the  whole  ancient 
Orient. 

THE  AGE  OF  THE  TABLET 

As  our  tablet  is  not  dated,  the  important  question  as  to 
its  age  can  be  decided  only  by  the  character  of  the  script  and 
by  internal  and  other  indirect  evidence. 

Notwithstanding  its  great  neatness,  the  script,  owing  to 


A.  POEBEL — CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  67 

the  small  size  of  the  signs,  is  of  a  somewhat  indefinite  character, 
and  therefore  allows  us  to  fix  the  time  of  the  tablet  only  within 
certain  limits.  The  widest  scope  would  be  between  2300  and 
1300,  i.  e.,  approximately  from  the  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Isin 
to  the  end  of  the  Cassite  period.  It  is  true,  for  the  dynasty 
of  Isin  and  for  the  first  half  of  the  dynasty  of  Babylon  the 
script  of  our  tablet  would  be  rather  advanced,  but  this  might 
be  due  to  the  smallness  of  the  characters,  as  in  such  a  case  the 
signs  show  a  greater  tendency  to  simplification  than  in  large 
script  which  allows  sufficient  room  for  all  the  details  of  the 
signs.  At  least  at  the  time  of  Rim-Sin,  Hammurabi  and 
Samsu-iluna,  but  also  in  closely  written  texts  from  the  time  of 
the  dynasty  of  Isin,  each  sign  represented  on  our  tablet  may 
be  found  in  exactly  the  same  form,  as  will  be  seen,  e.  g.,  from 
BE  VI,  2,  No.  49,  which  is  dated  in  the  time  of  Samsu-iluna, 
and  from  AO  5478,  RA  191 1,  p.  82,  dated  in  the  time  of  Rim-Sin. 
On  the  assumption  that  the  scribe  wrote  carefully,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  tablet  might  very  well  have  been  written  during  the 
earlier  Cassite  period,  although  two  or  three  signs  show  a  more 
archaic  form  than  we  find  on  any  other  tablet  of  the  Cassite 
period.  The  sign  mi,  e.  g.,  appears  in  our  text  as  <$f.  and  -0= 
with  three  or  four  horizontal  wedges  above  each  other,  while 
the  Cassite  tablets  always  have  <££z  with  two  wedges  only;  the 
sign  har  is  found  on  our  tablet  in  the  form  4^,  whereas  the 
published  Cassite  texts  show  either  the  form  j^  or  ^.  Note 
also  ^.<  and  t+J^  instead  of  w^<  and  M^<..  But-  to  assign 
an  earlier  date  to  our  tablet  merely  on  account  of  these 
few  indications  which  might  very  well  be  due  to  intentional 
archaism  on  the  part  of  the  scribe,  would  be  rather  hazardous, 
and  the  more  so  because  in  the  case  of  an  earlier  date  we  would 
have  to  go  back  at  least  to  the  time  of  Samsu-iluna;  for  up  to 
the  present  no  Nippur  tablet  dated  between  Samsu-iluna  and 
the  kings  of  Kardunias  has  come  to  light,  evidently  because 
Nippur  was  not  inhabited  during  the  greater  part  of  this  period. 
Even  less  satisfactory,  at  least  for  the  present,  must  remain 
an  attempt  to  find  indications  of  the  age  of  our  tablet  in  the 


68  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

form  of  the  language.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  text  is  written 
in  a  kind  of  Sumerian  which  shows  considerable  deviation 
from  the  idiom  used,  e.  g.,  in  the  royal  building  inscriptions, 
differences  which  moreover  betray  clearly  a  decay  of  the 
language  such  as  we  notice,  although  to  a  much  greater  extent, 
in  the  very  late  Sumerian  texts  of  the  Assyrian  and  neo- 
Babylonian  period.  Note,  e.  g.,  the  change  of  the  verbs  su — du 
and  si — sa  into  su — su-du  and  si — si-sa;  and  the  locative 
form  sa-ni-te-na-ge  instead  of  sa-ni-te-na-ka ;  it  has  likewise 
been  mentioned  that  the  text  has  by  no  means  been  carefully 
transmitted,  and  this  as  well -as  the  corruption  of  the  language 
might  very  well  be  taken  as  indications  of  a  late  date;  but  as 
at  the  present,  for  lack  of  the  necessary  material,  we  are  not 
yet  able  to  determine  to  what  extent  such  deviations  in  the 
late  Sumerian  texts  already  existed  in  texts  of  earlier  periods 
outside  the  royal  inscriptions,  this  conclusion  has  only  a  com- 
parative value.  Nevertheless  we  can  say  this  much,  that 
we  are  already  in  a  time  when  Sumerian  as  a  spoken  language 
can  have  survived  only  in  a  more  or  less  corrupt  condition; 
so  far  as  our  present  material  allows  us  to  draw  a  conclusion 
on  this  subject  the  process  of  decay  seems  to  have  set  in  during 
the  later  period  of  the  first  dynasty  of  Isin. 

Nor  do  we  gain  a  more  definite  result  from  internal  evi- 
dence which,  moreover,  will  prove  much  less  for  the  date  at 
which  the  tablet  was  actually  written  than  for  the  time  of  the 
first  composition  or  at  least  the  last  redaction  of  the  text.  The 
fact  that  our  tablet  mentions  the  highest  gods  in  the  order 
An,  Enlil,  Enki  and  Nin-harsagga  makes  it  impossible  to  place 
the  date  of  the  composition  of  the  text  at  or  before  the  time  of 
Gudea;  for  we  have  seen  that  Gudea  still  mentions  them  in 
the  old  order  An,  Enlil,  Nin-harsag  and  Enki.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  have  seen  that  a  number  of  kudurru  inscriptions 
which  belong  to  the  latest  period  of  the  Cassite  dynasty  and 
the  time  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Isin,  enumerate  the  gods 
in  the  same  order  as  our  tablet.  The  time  of  the  latter  dynasty, 
however,  would  have  to  be  regarded  as  the  lowest  limit  to  which 


A.  POEBEL— CREATION  AND  DELUGE  TEXT  69 

the  composition  of  the  text  could  be  referred,  since  from  that 
time  Marduk  begins  to  rank  above  the  goddess  Ninharsagga. 

I  think,  however,  the  observation  that  our  tablet  show-, 
a  remarkable  affinity  to  the  list  of  kings  which  is  published 
as  No.  5  of  this  volume,  will  lead  us  a  step  nearer  to  our  goal. 
Both  tablets  are  of  the  same  reddish-brown  clay,  of  at  least 
approximately  the  same  size1  and  the  same  shape  and,  what 
is  especially  important,  show  the  same  peculiarities  of  writ- 
ing. For  the  latter  compare,  e.  g.,  the  combination  of  the 
signs  an  and  en  into  ££[-  with  the  characteristic  development 
of  an  into  the  form  of  me.  It  seems  to  me,  therefore,  sufficiently 
certain  that  the  two  tablets  were  written  by  the  same  hand 
and  probably  were  intended  to  form,  together  with  one  or  two 
others,  a  series  of  tablets  on  which  the  scribe  wrote  an  outline 
of  the  history  of  Babylonia  from  its  earliest  beginnings  down 
to  his  own  time.  As  each  column  of  the  king  list  contained 
the  names  of  about  thirty-nine  or  forty  kings,3  the  missing 
portion  of  the  last  column  cannot  have  given  the  names  of 
more  than  nineteen  kings,  but  in  all  likelihood  much  less, 
as  there  must  have  been  left  some  space  for  the  summary 
and  probably  a  colophon.  On  a  rough  estimate  the  list  will 
thus  be  carried  down  to  approximately  the  latter  half  of  the 
dynasty  of  Babylon,  and  this  then  would  likewise  be  the  time 
when  the  list  as  well  as  the  deluge  and  creation  tablet  were 
written. 


1  The  width  of  the  tablet  which  contains  the  list  of  kings  was  probably  a  centimeter  less 
than  that  of  the  creation  and  deluge  text. 

2  Not  ^-wT  as  Hilprecht's  copy  shows.      For  a  similar  development  see  BE  VI,  2,  No.  8« 
(Rim-Sin,  2d  year  after  the  conquest  of  Isin);  595  (Samsu-iluna  26th  year),  both  from  Nippur; 

1155,12    (Ammiditana   3yth   year);     12011    (Ammi );    12314,4,    (Ammizaduga    5th   year); 

12414,18  (Ammi-zaduga  6th  year).     It  will  be  noted  that  this  form  of  the  combination  is  especially 
frequent  during  the  last  period  of  the  kingdom  of  Babylon,  but  it  is  likewise  found  in  closely 
written  literary  texts  from  the  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Isin. 

3  As  the  Babylonians  counted  139  kings  from  the  deluge  to  the  end  of  the  dynasty  of  Isin. 
the  first  three  columns  must  have  contained  the  names  of  1 18  kings  (139  kings  —  21  kings  of 
Ur  and    Isin),  and  each   column   therefore  those  of  about   thirty-nine  or  forty.     Hilprecht, 
judging   only  from  the  reputed  size  of  the  tablet,  estimated  each  column  at  about  forty-eight 
or  fifty  lines;  cf.  BE  XX,  i  p.  40,  note  i. 


70  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

THE  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE  ACCOUNT 

The  new  account  of  the  creation  and  deluge  is  important 
from  more  than  one  point  of  view.  First,  it  is  written  in 
Sumerian,  while  the  other  accounts,  with  the  exception  of 
three  texts  referring  to  the  creation,  exist  in  Semitic  Baby- 
lonian only,  and  although  we  have  seen  that  the  Sumerian 
idiom  of  our  text  is  no  longer  that  of  the  classical  period,  yet 
the  importance  of  our  tablet  is  sufficiently  established  by  the 
fact  that  it  proves  the  existence  of  entirely  independent  larger 
Sumerian  versions  of  the  creation  and  deluge  stories,  and  there- 
fore may  be  regarded  as  an  earnest  of  the  discovery  of  consider- 
ably older  Sumerian  accounts. 

However,  even  as  it  is,  this  Sumerian  text  reflects,  at  least 
in  one  point,  theological  conceptions  which  antedate  by  a 
considerable  period  most  of  those  accounts  with  which  we  have 
been  familiar.  The  older  forms  of  religious  belief  in  Baby- 
lonia can  at  the  present  time  be  inferred,  on  the  whole,  only 
from  more  or  less  occasional  allusions  in  royal  inscriptions, 
lists  of  gods,  etc.,  and  if  therefore  a  new  text  enables  us  to 
verify  one  of  these  conclusions  as  here  with  regard  to  Enlil's 
part  in  the  creation,  this  must,  of  course,  be  very  welcome. 
But  more  than  this,  our  new  text  enables  us  to  see  the  known 
parallel  sources  in  several  points  in  a  new  light,  as,  e.  g.,  with 
regard  to  the  position  of  one  of  the  most  important  deities 
of  the  older  Babylonian  pantheon,  the  goddess  Nin-harsag. 
Altogether  new,  however,  is  the  information  concerning  the 
prediluvian  cities  and  deities. 

Furthermore,  it  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  our 
text,  because  it  constitutes  an  independent  version,  is  of  con- 
siderable value  for  the  tracing  of  different  sources  within  the 
known  deluge  account  in  the  Gilgames  epic.  In  this  respect 
our  new  text  has  also  an  indirect  bearing  on  the  Biblical  account 
of  the  deluge  in  Genesis  6n~9n,  because  the  recognition  of  the 
composite  character  of  the  Babylonian  versions  gives  us  a  valu- 
able insight  into  that  literary  process  by  which  the  present  com- 
posite Biblical  account  of  the  deluge  must  have  been  evolved. 


II 

NEW  LISTS  OF  KINGS 


VOL.  IV. 


c»  -  1  1 

.!(, 


NEW  LISTS  OF  KINGS 

TRANSCRIPTIONS  AND  TRANSLATIONS 

No.  2 
The  beginning  of  Column  i  (about  16  lines)  is  missing. 


Col.   i     [.  .  .  .]-bu-um 

[.  .  .  +]1  300  mu  (n)i-[a] 
[u5?]  -[...] 

t     r 

5'  [...]-tab-ba 

]' 
[ga-]lu-mu-um-e 

[900]  mu  (n)i-a 

[z]u-ga-gi-ib-e 
10'  [8)40  mu  (n)i-a 

ar-.pi  dumu  mas-da-ge 

720  mu  (n)i-a 

e-ta-na  siba 

lu?-an?-su?-ni?-ib-e-d[a] 
15'  [l]u?  kur-kur-ra  mu-ni-gi- 
n[a]? 

63  53  mu  (n)i-a 

wi?-li-SAR?+  x 

dumu  e-ta-na-ge 

410  mu  (n)i-a 


V\ 


.....  .bum 

ruled  300  +  x  years. 


....  tabba 

Qalumum 

ruled  900  years. 

Zuqaqib 

ruled  840  years. 

Arpi,  son  of  a  muskenu, 

ruled  720  years. 

Etana,  the  shepherd, 

who  ascended  to  Heaven, 

who  subdued  (ruled)  all 

lands, 
ruled  635  years. 


.  son  of  Etana, 
ruled  410  years. 


1  Probably  900  (  =  600+300). 

2  Blank  line. 

3  Perhaps  625;  the  last  10  may  be  an  erasure. 

(73) 


74 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


20    en-me-nun-na-ge 
6 1 1  mu  (n)i-a 
me-lam-kis(i)kl 

dumu  en-me-nun-na-ge 
900  mu  (n)i-a 
25'  bar-sal-nun-na 

dumu  en-me-nun-na-ge 
1 200  mu  (n)i-a 
[mels-za^mfujg  dumu  bar- 
sal-nun-na^ge 

[1  /         \  N       A 

.  .  .  mju  (n)i-a 

30'  [ ]  dumu  bar-sal- 

nun-na-ge 
Col.  2    [.  .  .  mu  (n)i-aj 


En-me-nunna 
ruled  6 1 1  years. 
Melam-kis(i), 

son  of  En-me-nunna, 
ruled  900  years. 
Bar-sal-nunna, 

son  of  En-me-nunna, 
ruled  1200  years. 
Mes-za4-mug,  son  of  Bar- 
sal-nunna, 
ruled  .  .  .  years. 
,  son  of  Bar-sal- 
nunna, 
ruled  .  .  .  years. 


The  beginning  of  Column  2  (about  18  lines)  is  missing. 


nam-lugal-[bi] 
e-an-na-su  ba-t[um] 
e-an-na-ka 
5'  mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir 
dumu  dutu 
en-am 
lugal-am 
325  mu  (n)i-a 
10'  mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir 
[ ]  ba-an-tu 

[i  VN1  /     o   \  ^ 
]-.  .  .  .-su  ba-(a2-)e 

en-me-ir-3kar 

dumu  mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir- 


The  kingdom 

of  Kis 

passed  to  Eanna. 

In  E-anna 

Meskingaser, 

son  of  Samas, 

as  lord 

and  king 

ruled  325  years. 

Meskingaser 

descended  into  .... 

and  ascended  to.  .  .  . 

Enmerkar, 

son  of  Meskingaser, 


1  Perhaps  limmu  =  4? 

2  The  a  perhaps  erasure. 

3  The  horizontal  wedge  is  evidently  an  erasure. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS 


75 


15       ge 

luga[l]  unukl-ga 

lu-unukl-ga 

mu-un-da-du-a 

lugal-am 
20'  420  mu  (n)i-a 

dlugal-ban-da  si[ba] 

1 200  mu  (n)i-a 

ddumu-zi  SU-KUAGUNU 

uruki-ni  HA-Aki 
25'   100  mu  (n)i-a 

dGlS-BIL-ga[-mes] 

ab-ba-ni  a- .  .  [ ] 

en  kul-a[baki ] 

126  mu  [(n)i-a]? 
Col.  3    [ -lugal]5 

[dumu  dGI$-BIL-ga-mes- 

ge] 
f.  .  .  .  mu  (n)i-a 


king  of  Uruk, 

who  built  ( ) 

together  with   the  people 

of  Uruk,1  as  king 
ruled  420  years. 
Lugal-banda,  theshepherd, 
ruled  1 200  years. 
Dumu-zi,  the  hunter,2 
whose  city  was  HA-A, 
ruled  100  years. 
Gilgames, 

whose  father  was 

the  lord3  of  Kulab, 
ruled  i264  years. 

. . lugal, 

the  son  of  Gilgames', 


ruled 


years. 


The  beginning  of  Column  3  (about  21  lines)  is  missing. 


[unuki-ga] 
'  n[am-lugal-bi] 
ur[iki6-su  ba-tum?] 


uri[ki6-mal 


mes-an-ni-p[a-da] 
5'  lugal-am 


The  kingdom 
of  Uruk 
passed  to  Ur. 
In  Ur 

Mes-anni-pada 
became  king 


1  There  is  evidently  some  mistake  in  the  sentence;  have  we  to  read  lugal  unukl  lu-unukl- 
ga(-da)  mu-un-da-du-a  "the  king  who  built  Uruk  with  the  people. of  L'ruk?" 

2§U-HAGUNU,  usually  SU-rJA,  =  bairu  "fisher,"  "hunter."  Is  there  perhaps  a  differ- 
ence in  meaning  between  SU-HA  and  $U-HAGUNU? 

3  /.  e.,  high  priest. 

4  Perhaps  186,  if  the  preceding  wedge  belongs  to  the  number  and   not  to  the  sign  na, 
which,  however,  is  not  very  likely. 

5  Supplied  from  No.  65. 

•  The  name  of  the  city  is  written  uru-ABki  on  this  tablet. 


76  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

80  mu  (n)i-a  and  ruled  80  years. 

mes-ki-ag-nun-na  Mes-kiag-nunna, 

dumu-mes-an-ni-pa-da (-ge)     son  of  Mes-anni-pada, 

30  mu  (n):-a  ruled  30  years. 

10'  e-lu-[ ]  Elu 

25  mu  (n)i-a  ruled  25  years. 

ba-lu-[ ]  Balu 

36  mu  (n)[i-]a  ruled  36  years. 

4  lug[al]  4  kings 

15'  mu-bi  171  [mu]  ruled  171  years. 

urikl-ma  The  kingdom 

nam-lugal[-bi]  of  Ur 

a-wa-ankl[-su(ba-tum)?]  passed  to  Awan. 

20'  [a-]w[a]-a[nkl-wa]  In  Awan 


Rest  of  Column  3  (about  7  lines),  all  of  Columns  4-9  and  about  10  lines 
at  the  beginning  of  Column  10  are  missing. 


Col.  10    [di-din-dda-gan]  Idin-Dagan, 

dumud[S]U-[i-li-su-ge]  son  of  SU-ilisu, 

21  mu  (n)i[-a]  ruled  21  years. 

dis-me-dd[a-gan]  Isme-Dagan, 

dumu  di-din-dd[a-gan-ge]         son  of  Idin-Dagan, 
5'  20  mu  (n)i-[a]  ruled  20  years. 

dli-bi-it1[istar]  Libit-Istar, 

dumu  di-din-dda-g[an-ge]         son  of  Idin-Dagan, 
1 1  mu  (n)i-a  ruled  1 1  years. 

dur-dni[n[-IB]  Ur-NinIB, 

10'          dumudiskur-f .          .]  son  of  Iskur.  . 


mu-.  .  .  .[ J  

bal-  [ ]  dynasty 


Rest  of  Column  10  (about  21  lines)  is  missing. 


1  The  text  has  da. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS 


77 


Col.  ii    su-nigin  5I1  lugal 

mu-bi  i8[ooo+ +  ] 

9  mu[.  .  .  iti Q] 

5    a-ra-4[-kam] 
sa-kis(i)[ki] 
su-nigin  22  lu[gal] 
mu-bi  26i[o-hx2  muj 
6  iti  1 5  u  ib-[a] 
10'  a-ra-^-kam 
sa-unukl-ga 
su-nigin  13  lugal 
mu-bi  396  mu 

S\  A 

ib-a 

1 5    a-ra-3-kam 
sa-urikl-ma 
su-nigin  3  lugal 
mu-bi  356  mu 

ib-a 

20    a-ra-i-kam, 
sa-a-wa-ankl 
su-nigin  i  lugal 
mu-bi  7  mu 
a-ra-i-kam 

9C       %X-  \  1 

2 5    sa-. .  .  .  [ 


days 


Total:  51'  kings 

ruled 

18009+  •  •  •  years 

. . .  .months. . 
four  times 
in  KiS. 

Total:  22  kings 
ruled  261  o+x2  years 

6  months  and  1 5  days, 
five  times 
in  Uruk. 
Total:    13  kings 
ruled  396 

years 

three  times 
in  Ur. 

Total:  3  kings 
ruled  356 

years 
once 
in  Awan. 
Total:    i  king 
ruled  7  years 
once 


in 


[a-r]a-i-kam  once 

Rest  of  Column  1 1  (about  1 5  lines)  is  missing. 


Col.  12    [su-nigin  12]  lugal 
[mu-bi     1)96 
[mu]  ib-a 


Total:    12  kings 
ruled  196 
years 


1  The  first  two  upper  wedges  of  the  number  are  written  very  close  together,  so  that   it 
would  not  be  altogether  impossible  to  assume  that  the  scribe  wrote  40  over  another  number. 
But  this  is  not  very  likely. 

2  Only  the  units  are  broken  away. 


78 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


5   [sa-]a-ga-deki 
su-nigin  21  lugal 
mu-b]i  125  mu 

40  u  ib-a 
a-ra-i-kam 
10   sa-ugnim1 

gu-ti-umkl 
[su-nigin]  1 1  lugal 
[mu-b]i  159  mu 

ib-ag 
1 5    [sa-i-s]i-inkl-na 

1 1 


in  Agade. 
Total:  21  kings 
ruled  125  years 

and  40  days 
once 
in  the  people 

of  Gutium. 
Total:  1 1  kings 
ruled  1 59 

years 
in  Isin. 

1 1 
cities of  royalty 


[  uru-]nam-lugal-la 

[ ]-AG-bi  ; 

[su-nigin-]su-nigin  1 34  lugal  grand-total:  134  kings; 

20   [(su-nigin-)jsu-nigin  mu-bi  grand-total  of  their  years 

288oo[  ]+6o+i6          (of  reign):  288y6[+?] 

[  ]2i?[  ]  [ months]   21?   [days] 


The  rest  of  Column  12'  is  missing. 

No.  3 

Beginning  of  Column  i  is  missing. 


Col.      I     [ 


.-b]u-um 
.]  mu^ni-a 
]-ba2 


[900+?]  mu  (n)i-a 


[....]  mu  (n)i-a 
ga-l[u-mu-u]m-e 


bum 

ruled  ....  years. 

U3(?)ba(or  Us(?)zu) 

ruled  .  .  .  years. 

UsFtabba 

ruled  ....  years. 

Qalumum 


1  The  sa  is  perhaps  erased. 

2  Perhaps  zu. 


A     POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  79 

900  m[u  (n)i-a]  ruled  900  years. 

[z]u-ga-gi-[ib-e]  Zuqaqib 

io    840  mu[(n)i-a]  ruled  840  years. 

[a]r-bu-um  dumu  rria§cnda-  Arbum,  the  son  of  a  mu§- 

ge  kinu, 

[7)20  mu  (n)i-a  ruled  720  years. 

[e]-ta-na  siba  Etana,  the  shepherd 

lu £-da  who  ascended 

15  i ].... 

Rest  of  Column  i  and  beginning  of  Column  2  are  missing. 

Col.    2    ma(?)-...-ga(?)..  [..].[..]      

900  mu  (n)i-a  ruled  900  years. 

AC?  dumu  en-me-bar- .[.  .]     .  .  .,  son  of  En-me-bar. . . 

625  mu  (n)[i-a]  ruled  625  years. 

5    i525(?)m[u ]  1525  (?)  years  . 

en-me-b[a]r-[ ]  (of)  En-me-bar. . . . 

23(?)  23  kings 

mu-bi  1 8000+ [ mu]  ruled  18000  +  .  .  .  .  years 

iti-3  u  3  i[b-a]  3  months  and  3  days. 

io    [k]is(i)k[i ]  The  kingdom 

[nam-lugal-bi  ]  of  Kis 

[e-an-na-su  ba-tum]  passed  to  Eanna. 

e-a[n-na-ka  In  Eanna 

m[es-ki-in-ga-se-ir  Meskingaser,  etc. 

•  5    [ 1     '  -.. 

Rest  of  Column  2,  Columns  3-6'  and  beginning  of  Column  7'  are  missing. 


Col.    /  [ ] 

u[r ]  Ur-.; 

6  [mu  (n)i-a  ruled  6  years. 

..[ ]  Ba(?) 

[ J 

Rest  of  Column  7  and  beginning  of  Column  8  are  missing. 


80  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

Col.    8'  UJ41  [mu-  (n)i-a]  ruled  44  years. 

[sa]r-ga[-li-sar-ri]  Sar-gali-sarri, 

[dumu?-]dumu  na[-ra-am-       grandson  of  Naram-Sin, 


24  mu  (n)[i-aj  ruled  24  years. 

5'  [...+]  37mu[...]  ...  years...  . 

[  .....  sa]r-ru-GI-  .  .'[..'..]      the  family  of  Sarru-kin  .  . 

ma-nu-um  sarrum  Who  was  king? 

ma-nu-um  la  sarrum  Who  was  not  king? 

i-gi-gi  lugal  Igigi,  the  king, 

10'  i-mi  lugal  I  mi,  the  king, 

na-ni  lugal  Nani,  the  king, 

e-lu-lu  lugal  Elulu,  the  king, 

4-bi  3  mu  ib-a  these  four  ruled  3  years. 

du[-du  .......  ]  Dudu  ..... 

15'  I  ............  i  .......... 


Rest  of  Column  8  is  missing. 


No.  4 


Beginning  of  Column  i  is  missing. 


Col.     i    mu-bi  2  [6  ib-a]  ruled  26  years. 

unuki  ......  [  ........  ]  Uruk  .........  , 

nam-lugal-[bi]  its  kingdom 

ugni[m     ]  passed  to  the  people 
5r          gu-ti-umkl  [  ........  ]  of  Gutium. 

im-bi-[  ............  ]  Imbi  ...... 

3  mu  (n)i-[a]  ruled  3  years. 

in-ki-[  .....  ]  Inki.  .  .  . 

[....].  .-da  [  ..........  ]  and  .....  da.  ... 

10'  [  ..............  ] 

Rest  of  Column  i  ,  Columns  2-7  and  beginning  of  Column  8  are  missing. 

1  Perhaps  54.     Beginning  of  number  broken  away. 


A.    POEBEL  —  NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS 


81 


Col.  8' 


mu-b[i? 
nam-lugal-.  .  . 
1  1  uru 
i39lugal 
5'  mu-bi  32243 
mu 


kingship  ..... 

1  1  cities 

1  39  kings 
their  years  (of  reign) 

32243  years, 


I 


J  iti?  18?  u?.  .[.  .]     ____  months  and  i8?days. 


Rest  of  Column  8'  is  missing. 


CBS  15365,  Reverse  (p, 

Beginning  of  the  column  is  missing. 


Col.  i'    4[+ 
di[r-ra 


ruled  4+x  years 
Irra-  ......  ' 


u[r-  .....  ] 
dumu  nu-mu[- 
5'    6  mu  (n)-i[a] 
su-mu-a-bu-u[m] 
iti  8  (n)i-a 
[i-k]u-un-pi-istar 
[..-..  mu  (n)]i-a 


son  of 

ruled  6  years. 

Sumu-abum 

ruled  8  months. 

I  kun-pi-  1  star 

ruled  ....     ears. 


Rest  of  this  column  and  beginning  of  the  following  are  missing. 


Col.  2    [su-nigin.  .  .  .lug]al 
[m]u-bi  125 

XI  A 

ib-a 
[a-r]a-6-kam 

r  v  v  1          ki 

[sa-....]..   -a 
[su-nigin lugajl 


5 


Total:    .. 
ruled  125 
years 
six  times 

in 

Total: 


kings 


kings,  etc. 


Rest  of  column  is  missing. 


82  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

No.  5 

The  upper  part  of  Column  i  is  missing. 

Col.  i      [ mu   .  .  .  in-a] 

[....]  ...  [-.-...  mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

[ ] [  mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

.  .[.  .  .]-um?-e?  [mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

5'     [ ].AN? [mu    ...  in-a] 

.[ ].  .  .  [mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

[....]..[....] mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

-tab?-ba?  mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

ka-lu-mu-um  mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

ID'     zu-ga-ki-ib  mu    .  .  .  in-a] 

ar-pi-u  dumu  mas-da-ge  mu[  .  .  .  in-a] 

e-ta-na  siba  lu  an-su  al?-e[-da ]! 

m[u  .  .  .  in-a] 

ba?2-li-z£3  dumu  e-ta-na-ge  mu[  .  .  .  in-a] 

15'     en-me-nun-na  mu  6oo[+  x  in-a] 
me-lam-kis(i)kl  dumu  en-me-nun- 

na-ge  mu  6oo[-f  x  in-a] 

bar-sal-nun-na  mu  6o[o  +  x  in-a] 
mes-za4-mug(?)  dumu  bar-sal- 

nun-na-ge  mu  [.  .  .  in-a] 
....  GIS-GU(?)  dumu  mes-za4 

-mug(?)-ge  [mu  .  .  .  in-a] 

20'     en?-me?-dur-mes?-e?  m[u  .  .  .  ni-a] 

....  -za?4-..TAB?-DU-  ....  m[u 


[e]n?-me-bara?-gi-su?  lu?  ma-da?  m[i?- 
Columns  2  and  3  are  missing. 

1  "Etana,  the  shepherd,  who  ascended  to  heaven  [and 

2  Or  zu-? 

3  See  lists  No.  5  and  K  8532. 

4  Or  limmu  =  4? 

6  "En?-me?-bara?-gi-Su?,  who the  land  (?)  and 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  83 

Col.    4    unkl-ma  ur-rlengur-ge  lugal-am    mu  18  in-a1 

dun-gi  dumu  ur-dengur-ge  mu  58  in-a 

AMAR-dsin(-na)2  dumu  dun-gi-ge3  mu  9  in-a 

SU-dsin  dumu  AMAR-dsin-na-ge  mu  7  in-a 

5    i-bi-dsin  dumu  $U-dsin-na-ge  mu  25  in-a 

5  lugal-e-ne   (mu)4  117  in-  a-es 

uri[k]'  bal-bi  ba-an-kur  nam-lugal-bi  i-si-inkl-$u  ba.[.  .] 

[i]-si-inkl-na  is-bi-dir-ra5  lugal-am  mu  32  in-a.6 

SU-i-li-su  dumu  is-bi-dir-ra-ge  mu  10  in-a 

10    i-din-dda-gan  dumu  SU-i-li-su-ge  mu  21  in-a 

is-me-dda-gan  dumu  i-din-dda-gan-ge  mu  20  in-a 
l[i-[b]i-it-istar  dumu  is-me-dda-gan-ge  mu  1 1  in-a 

[ur-dnin-]IB  mu  28  in-a 

[bur-ds]in    dumu    [u]r-dnin-IB-ge  mu  21  [i]n-[a] 

1 5    [i-te-ir-pi-sa]  du[mu  b]ur-dsin  mu    5  in-[a] 

[dir-ra-i-]mi-ti  mu    7  [in-a] 

..  ..[ ]...  iti  6i[n-a] 

den-lil-[b]a-[n]i  mu  24  i[n-a] 

za-a[w7-b]i-  ia  mu    3  i[n-a] 

20    mu   4i[n-a] 

[ ]  mu    4  i[n-a] 

dsin-ma-g[ir]  mu  1 1  [in-a 

da-m[i]-iq-i-li-su  dumu  dsin-ma-gir  mu    3  [in-a 


[16  lugal-e-ne  [m]u  225  iti  6  in-a[-es] 

25  [...  .]•    •[-      -i 

Rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 

'"In  Ur  Ur-Engur  as  king  (or  having  become  king)  ruled  18  years." 

2  Omit  -na  as  mistake  of  the  scribe. 

3  In  older  Sumerian  one  would  expect  dun-gi-ra-ge;   the  scribe  who  drew  up  this  list  treats 
dungi  as  a  noun  ending  with  a  vowel. 

4  Omitted  by  the  scribe. 

6  The  determinative  dingir  before  ir-ra  proves  that  the  text  was  written  later  than  Samsu- 
iluna. 

•"The  dynasty  of  Ur  was  ovetthrown,  its  kingdom  passed  to  Isin.      In  Isin  ISbi-lrra  as 
king  (having  become  king)  ruled  32  years." 

7  Or  ab. 


84 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM— BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


K8532+K8533  + 
Obv.  Col.  2r_ 

1 


DINGIR-ILLA(D)  dumu  ki-min  [.  . 

Ilu-illat,  the  son  of  ditto   (  =  Etana), 
en-men-nun-na  [.. 

En-men-nunna 
me-lam2-kis(i)k[il3    dumu    ki-min  [.  . 


.  mu  in-a] 

ruled  ...  years. 
.  mu  in-a] 

ruled  .  .  .  years. 
.  mu  in-a] 


Melam-kisu,  the  son  of  ditto  (=  Enmennunna),  ruled  .  .  .  years. 

1  King,  SEH  III,  pp.  143,  145.     This  list,  when  complete,  enumerated  the  kings  from  the 
deluge,  or  probably  from  the  creation,  to  an  apparently  considerable  time  beyond  the  seventh 
dynasty  of  the  larger  Babylonian  list  of  kings. 

2  Sign  a;  read  thus  instead  of  King's  a-bil;  has  the  original  perhaps  me? 

3  King's  copy  shows  kisS-Su. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS 


85 


RECONSTRUCTION  OF  THE  CHRONOLOGICAL 
SYSTEM  OF  THE  BABYLONIANS 

I.  Period:  Apsu  and  Tiamat. 
II.  Period:   Lahmu  and  Lahama. 

III.  Period:  An-sar  and  Ki-sar. 

Conquest  of  Apsu. 

||  Conquest  of  Tiamat:   creation  of  Heaven  and  earth, 

mankind,  etc. 


IV.  Period:  The  kings  before  the  flood. 

a.    CK  TroAews  /?a/3vA.wvos 


I  . 


||  First  revelation  of  knowl- 
edge by  fiavi/r/s:  first  year  of 
Aloros. 

2.  aAcurapos,  son  of  Aloros         OOO 


©OOO 


ft.    (K   TroAcws 

(Abydenos). 


3.      / 

||  Second  revelation  by  Av- 
vrjSwTos  at  the  end  of  the  reign 
of  Amelon  or  at  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Ammenon. 


5- 


©OO 


IO  (rapoi 


12 

18 


36,000  \-ears 


10,800 


,,        46,800 


43,200 
64,800 


86 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


6.   Sawvos 

||   Third    revelation   by   Eve- 

SWKOS,  'Eveuyayu,os,  'Ej/eu/itouAos  and 


7. 


en-me-dur-an-ki 
||   Fourth  revelation  by  ' 


y.    IK 
8.   ci 


(i.  e.  Larak). 


9.   wnapTTjs     [for     ft> 
etc.) 

ubara-dtu-tu 


(8.   From  Surrippak) 
(GUg.   Ep.   XI.) 

10.  gio-ovOpos  (=Hasis-wat- 
ru),  son  of  Otiartes 

[w]a-at-ra-am-ha-si-is, 
a-tar-PI(  =  basis) 

u-ta-na-(p)is-tim,  ut(a) 
napistim,  son  of  Ubara 
Tutu. 

zi-u-GID-du,  zi-SU-da 


Total:    10  kings 
t|     Deluge. 


IO  crapoL 

30,000  years 

18       ,, 

64,800 

10 

36,000 

8      „ 

28,800 

18      „ 

64,800 

1  2O  <ra/3ot 

432,000  years 

A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS 


87 


V.  Period:  The  kings  after  the  flood 
i.     FIRST  KINGDOM  OF  Kis"1 


I. 

2. 


son  of  Euechios 


4  vypoi     2,400  years 
4      »       2,700      „ 


years 


3'-  [.:..] [ ] 

4'-  [ ]-um?-e 

5'-  [ JAN?  [ ] 

6'.  [ ]-bu-um    .  .  ] 

7'.  [us]?-ba(or  zu)? 

8' -tab-ba 900?      ,, 

1  Syncellus  (90  C  and  92  AB)  gives  the  following  list  of  kings  after  the  deluge: 
A.     Seven  Chaldean  kings. 

1.  curios  6  years  (+  a  fraction) 

2.  x<afjMo-pr)\o<;  7  years  (+  a  fraction) 
}.     Trojyos                       35  years 

4.  ve\ov(3rj<;  43  years 

5.  ra/?ios  48  years 

6.  ovipaAAo?  40  years 

7-     C**&0»«  46  (45)  years 


Tra/oavvo? 
w/?owva/3os 


C. 


Six  Arab  kings. 

45  (44)  years 

40  years 
;    28  years 

37  years 

40  years 

25  years 


Foriy-one  Assyrian  kings. 
55  years,  etc. 

With  the  exception  of  the  first  two  names  taken  from  Berosus,  this  list  is  spurious,  serving 
merely  the  purpose  of  filling  out  the  gap  between  the  deluge  and  the  first  king  of  Assyria  in 
Syncellus'  chronological  system.     The  years  of  reign  of  the  first  two  kings  are  arrived  at  hv 
dividing  2400  and  2700  by  360,  i.  e.,  by  counting  each  year  as  one  day. 
2  2  and  i'  are  perhaps  identical. 


VOL.  IV. 


88  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

9'.  ga-lu-mu-um,   ka-lu-mu-um 900     years 

10'.  zu-ga-gi-ib,  zu-ga-ki-ib 840 

1 i'.  ar-pi,  son  of  a  muskinu 720 

ar-bu-um,  ar-pi-u 
12'.  e-ta-na,  the  shepherd 635*       ,, 

de-ta-na 
13'.  wa-\i-\,  son  of  Etana 410 

ba?-li-jj,  AN-ILLA(D) 

14'.  en-me-nun-na,  en-men-nun-na 611        ,, 

15'.  me-lam-kis(i)kl,  son  of  En-me-nunna      900        ,, 

me-lam-kis(i)k[il 

16'.  bar-sal-nun-na,  son  of  En-me-nun-na.     1,200       „ 
17'.  mes-za2-MUG?3,     son     of     Bar-sal- 

nunna ,, 

18'.  en?-GlS?-GU?,  son  of  Bar-sal-nunna. 

19'.  en?-me?-dur?-mes?-e 

20'.   .  .  .  -za?    

21'.  4[e]n?-me?-bara?-gi?-su? ,, 

22.  4 900 

23.  AG(?),  son  of  En-me-bara-[ ]..       625        ,, 


Total:   23  kings 18,000  +  x    years    3 

months  and  3  days. 

2.     KINGDOM  OF  EANNA  =  FIRST  KINGDOM  OF  URUK 

1.  mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir,  son  of  Samas,  high 

priest  and  king 325  years 

2.  en-me-ir-kar,  son  of  Meskingaser,  king      420     ,, 

3.  dlugal-ban-da,  the  shepherd 1,200    ,, 

lugal-ban-da 

4.  ddumu-zi,  the   hunter   (or  fisherman) 

from  the  city  of  HA-A 100     ,, 

1  Or  625. 

2  Perhaps  limmu  =  4. 

3  Perhaps  ME-KAK? 

4  21'  and  22  are  perhaps  identical. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  89 


5.    dG!S-BIL-ga-mes,  son  of  Nin-sun  and 

the  high  priest  of  Kullah |261  years 

GlS-GlN-mas,  etc. 

6'.  [.      .  .  .]-  lugal,  son  of  Gilgames 

Lacuna  of  about  4  to  6  kings. 


Total:  6  +  x  kings 2,171  +  x  years 

3.     FIRST  KINGDOM  OF  UR 

1 .  mes-an-ni-pa-da 80  years 

2.  mes-ki-ag-nun-na,    son    of    Mes-anni- 

pada   . .  «       30     „ 

3-  e-lu-[....]   ../..         25      „ 

4-  ba-lu-[...]    36     „ 


Total :  4  kings 171  years 


4.     KINGDOM  OF  AWAN 

1  •  years 

2. 

...      , , 

3 


Total :   3  kings 356  years, 

5'.     KINGDOM  OF  


7  years 

Total :    i  king 7  years 

6'.     KINGDOM  OF 


1Or  186? 


90  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

7'.     SECOND  KINGDOM  OF  UR 

i '.  AN-na-ni ...  years 

2' .  lu-dnanna,  son  of  AN-na-ni 

3 ?••      " 

4 » 


Total :  4  kings 1 08  years 

8'.     FIRST  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  ADAB? 


/'.  Lugal-da-LU 
2'.  me-IGI.    .[. 


Total :   2  (+x)  kings years 

9'.     SECOND  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  Kis 


me-silim .  . 
ur-zag-e.. . 
lugal-tar-si 
en-bi-istar. 


Total:    i(+  3)  (  +  x)  kings  .  .  .  years 


10'.     SECOND  (?)  KINGDOM  OF  URUK? 

en-sa-kus-an-na    lugal    ki-en-gi    lugal 
kalam-ma 


11'.     FIRST  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  DPI? 


zu-zu 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  91 

12'.     THIRD  KINGDOM  OF  Kis? 


e-an-na-dum 

e-an-na-dinnanna-ib-gal-ka-ka-dur 
lum-ma 


13.     SECOND  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  UPI 

1.  KALAM-zi 30  years 

2.  KALAM-da-lu-lu ,2 

3-  ur-sa 6     „ 

4.   BA-SA-dsahan 20 

5-  i-su-il..  24     M 

6.  SU-dsin,  son  of  Isu-il •  7     ,, 


Total :  6  kings 99  years 

14.     FOURTH  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  Kis 

1 .  ku-dba-u 1 41  years 

2.  BA-$A-dsin,  son  of  Ku-Bau 25       ,, 

3.  ur-dza-ma-ma. 6 

4.  zi-mu-tar 30 

5.  u-zi-wa-tar,  son  of  Zimutar '  6 

6.  el-mu-ti 1 1       ,, 

7.  i- ....  -  samas 1 1       ,,  ^ 

8 -ia- 3 


Total :  8  kings IO61  years 

15.     THIRD  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  URUK 
i .  lugal-zag-gi-si 25  years 


Total :    i  king 25  years 


1  See  OLZ  XV  (1912),  Cols.  289-294. 


92 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

16.     KINGDOM  OF  AGADE 


i .    sar-ru-G  I  ( =  kin) years 

sar-um-GI(  =  kin);  sar-ru-ki-in, 
sarru-GI-NA,  Sar-ru-G  IN,  sa-ru- 
ki-in 

2'.  (i)ri-mu-us  lugal  kis 

(i)ri-mus 
3'.  ma-an-is-tu-su  lugal  kis(i) 

4' • 

5.    dna-ra-am-dsin  sar  a-ga-dekl  sar  ki-ib- 

ra-tim   ar-ba-im. 


na-ram-  sin 

6.    dsar-ga-li-sar-n  sar  a-ga-dekl 
sar-ka-li-e-sarri 


7.  i-gi-gi,  i-gi-gi 

8.  i-mi.. 


9.  na-ni,  na-nu-um 

10.  e-lu-lu,  i-lu-lu 

1 1.  du-du 

12.  SU-DUR-KIB,  son  of  Dudu 


44(4-10?)  years 
24  years 


21 

15 


Total :    1 2  kings 1 97  years 


17.     FOURTH  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  URUK 


1 .  ur-nigm 

2.  ur-glSginar,  son  of  Ur-Nigin. 
3 -da 

4.  BA-SA-i-li 

5.  ur-dutu 


Total:   5  kings 


26  years 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS 


93 


1 8.     KINGDOM  OF  GUTIUM 
i.  im-bi1-! ] 3  years 

V 

(a)  e-ir-ri-du-pi-zi-ir  da-num  3ar  gu- 

ti-im  u  ki-ib-ra-tim  ar-ba-im. 
en-ri-da-pi-zi-ir 

(b)  la-si-ra-ab,  da-num  sar  gu-ti-im 
4-10.  <;  (c)  si-u-um,  lugal  gu-ti-umkl 

(d)  sar3-a-ti-gu-bi-si-in(?)4 

( (g) '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. '. '. '. '.'.'.'. '. '. 

1 1 .  ti-ri-ga-a-an  lugal  gu-ti-umkt 
ti-riq-qa-an 

Total :    1 1  kings 125  years 

19.     FIFTH  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  URUK 

i .  dutu-he-gal years 

The  other  kings  of  this  dynasty  are  not  known. 

Total :    i  (+x)   kings years 

Lacuna,  in  which  probably  has  to  be  placed  dynasty  20'. 

20'.     SECOND  (?)   KINGDOM  OF  ADAB 

lugal-an-na-mu-un-du,    lugal    dub-da- 

limmu-ba . .  years 

lugal-an-na-mu-un-du 

Total:    i(-fx)  king(s)..  . . .  years 

1  Perhaps  ga. 

2  Perhaps  ma. 

3  Perhaps  to  be  read  m3? 

4  Is  perhaps  not  a  king  of  Gutium. 


94 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


21.     THIRD  KINGDOM  OF  UR 


1 .  ur-dengur 18  years 

2.  dun-gi,  son  of  Ur-Engur 58 

ddun-gi 

3.  dAMAR-dSin,  son  of  Dungi 19      „ 

4.  dSU-dsin,  son  of  Amar-Sin 7 

5.  di-bi-dsin,  son  of  SU-Sin 25 

i-bi-dsin 

Total :   5  kings 117  years 

22.     KINGDOM  OF  ISIN 

1 .  dis-bi-ir-ra 32  years 

is-bi-ir-ra,  is-bi-dir-ra 

2.  SU-i-li-su,  son  of  Isbi-Irra 10 

3.  di-din-dda-gan,  son  of  SU-ilisu 21 

4.  dis-me-dda-gan,  son  of  Idin-Dagan. .  .         20     ,, 

5.  dli-bi-it-istar,  son  of  (Idin-Dagan  or) 

Isme-Dagan 1 1  ,, 

li-bi-it-istar,  li-bit-dis-tar 

6.  dur-dnin-IB,  son  of  Iskur-[. .  .  .] 28  „ 

7.  dbur-dsin,  son  of  Ur-NinIB 21  ,, 

8.  di-te-ir-pi-sa,5  son  of  Bur-Sin 5  ,, 

di-te-ir-pi-sa1 

9.  dir-ra-i-mi-ti 7     „ 

dir-ra-ZAG-LU 

10.  .  . . .      ,,     6  months 

1 1 .  den-lil-ba-ni 24     ,, 

den-lil-DU2 

12.  dza-an-bi-a,3za-ab?-bi-a  or  za-am?-bi-a4        3     ,, 

13 5      » 

1  Tablets  from  Nippur. 

2  King,  Chronicles,  No.  26472  Rev.  6. 

3  Tablet  from  Nippur,  Hilprecht,  ZA  1907. 

4  No.  5  (king  list). 


A.    POEBEL— NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS      .  95 

•4-  4  years 

15.  sm-ma-gir , , 

1 6.  da-mi-iq-i-li-s'u,  son  of  Sin-magir ....         23 

da-mi-iq-i-li-su,  dam-ki-i-li-su. 


Total:    16  kings r  225  years  6  months 

Perhaps  partly  contemporaneous  with  the  dynasty  of  Isin: 


23'.     KINGDOM  OF 

Predecessors  unknown. 


4+x  years 
ra ] 6     „ 

3'.  su-mu-a-bu-um :.         . .      n     8  months 

4'.  i-ku-un-pi-istar '., 

Successors  unknown. 

Total:  4(  +  x)  kings m+x  years 

24/-29/.     Six?  DYNASTIES  OF   ... 


years 


Total :    .  .  .  kings 125  years 

and  possibly 

3o'-34/.     FOUR  OR  FIVE  OTHER  INTERMEDIARY  DYNASTIES 
Total :    ....  kings years 

These  and  the  preceding  dynasties  probably  comprise 
Dynasty  23'  and  some  of  the  dynasties  of'Ur,  Larsam,  Kis 
and  Babylon.  On  the  question  of  the  contemporaneousness  of 
these  dynasties  with  that  of  Isin,  see  a  later  chapter.1 

1  Considerable  light  will  probably  be  thrown  on  this  question  by  the  publication  of  a  list 
of  kings  from  Warka  (or  Senkireh),  now  in  the  Museum  of  Yale  University,  which  enumerates 
the  various  kings  of  Larsam  with  their  regnal  years. 


96  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

35.     KINGDOM  (OR  KINGDOMS)  OF  LARSAM 

Probably  contained  in  24^3 5'. 

a.  nu-ur-d 

a+i.  dsin-i-din-nam,  son  of  Nur-IM 

b.  dsin-i-ki-sa-am 

c.  nu-ur-^samas1 

d.  i-lu-ni  lugal2 

e.  a-bi-sa-ri-e3,   a-bi-sa-ri-e4,   lugal    urikl-ma   lugal    larsam1 

-ma5 
/.  dwarad-dsin,  son  of  Kudurmabuk 

warad-dsin 

f+\'.  dri-im-dsin,6  son  of  Kudurmabuk 
ri-im-dsin,  ri-im-sin,  rim-dsm 


Total :    ...  kings years 

36.     KINGDOM  OF  BABYLON 

Kings  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  world. 

1.  ha-am-mu-ra-bi,  son  of  Sin-muballit.  .      13  (or  14)  years7 

dha-am-mu-ra-bi,   ha-mu-ra-bi, 
ha-mu-ra-am? 

2.  sa-am-su-i-lu-na,  son  of  Hammu-rabi.     29  (or  30)  years7 

37.     KINGDOM  OF  THE  COUNTRY  OF  THE  SEA 
i .  i-li-ma-ilum 2(  +  x)  years 

1  Tablet  from  Larsam  (?),  unpublished. 

2  Contract  from  Warka  in  the  possession  of  V.  Scheil.    See  Scheil,  OLZ,  1914,  Col.  246  (Un 
nouveau  roi  de  Larsam). 

3  Unpublished  tablets  from  Oheimir;  see  Scheil,  RT  34,  p.  1 19. 

4  Unpublished  tablets  from  Oheimir,  ibidem;  mace-head  of  ARAD-dUTU,CT  33,  50  (104836). 

5  Mace-head  of  ARAD-dUTU. 

6  Between  Warad-Sin  and  Rim-Sin  perhaps  an  intermediary  dynasty. 
'  As  rulers  over  the  whole  of  Babylonia. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  97 


ANNOTATIONS  TO  THE    KING    LISTS 

The  new  chronological  material  contained  in  the  fragments 
of  king  lists  published  in  this  volume  allows  us  to  make  a  con- 
siderable advance  towards  the  final  reconstruction  of  the  chro- 
nological system  by  which  the  Babylonians  spanned  the  long 
periods  of  their  country's  history.  While  up  to  the  present 
the  dynasty  of  Upi  in  Scheil's  list  has  been  the  oldest  of  those 
known  from  native  king  lists,  we  can  now  place  before  the 
kingdom  of  Upi  ten  or  at  least  eight  other  kingdoms,  the  earliest 
of  which  lie  entirely  in  the  legendary  period  and,  in  fact,  lead 
us  as  far  back  as  the  deluge  according  to  the  belief  of  the  Baby- 
lonians. Furthermore,  the  new  fragments  give  us — and  this  is 
an  entirely  new  feature — various  summaries  in  which,  among 
other  data,  it  is  stated  how  often  a  Babylonian  or  foreign  city 
or  country  enjoyed  the  privilege  of  being  the  seat  of  the  ruling 
king,  thus  enabling  us  to  attribute  at  least  to  some  of  the  king- 
doms a  definite  designation,  as,  e.  g.,  to  the  dynasty  preceding 
that  of  Isin  the  designation  "Third  kingdom  of  Ur."  But 
what  is  perhaps  the  most  important  feature  of  these  lists, 
is  that  two  of  the  fragments  give  the  total  length  of  the  period 
from  the  deluge  to  the  eleventh  and  sixteenth  kings  of  the  well- 
known  dynasty  of  Isin  and  thus  make  it  possible  in  connec- 
tion with  information  derived  from  the  excerpts  "of  Berosus 
to  map  out  the  framework  of  the  chronological  system  of  the 
Babylonians  from  the  times  when  Apsu  and  Tiamat  were  the 
solitary  rulers  of  the  universe  down  to  the  latest  periods  of 
Babylonian  history.  It  is  true  that  even  with  the  new  material 
at  our  disposal  there  are  still  some  serious  gaps  left  within  this 
system  which  at  the  present  can  only  be  bridged  by  state- 
ments in  the  summaries  concerning  the  length  of  certain 
dynasties  or,  what  is  worse,  only  by  more  or  less  accurate 
calculations,  quite  apart  from  the  fact  that  we  still  lack  a  means 
to  connect,  beyond  any  doubt,  the  dynasty  of  Isin  with  the 


98  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

later  Babylonian  dynasties.  Nevertheless,  we  have  at  least 
this  consolation  for  the  present,  that  sooner  or  later,  when 
a  systematic  classification  of  the  material  in  the  Museums 
at  Philadelphia  and  Constantinople  is  undertaken,  we  shall 
recover  the  whole  list;  for  the  texts  published  in  this  volume 
belong  to  five  separate  tablets  and  the  possibility  that  the 
hope  just  expressed  will  materialize  is,  for  this  reason,  very 
great. 

THE  DATE  OF  THE  TEXTS 

The  list  of  kings  which  forms  the  second  text  of  this  vol- 
ume was  drawn  up  during  the  reign  of  the  eleventh  king  of 
Isin.  This  follows  from  the  fact  that  the  summary  in  Column 
10  assigns  to  the  dynasty  of  Isin  only  11  kings  and  159  years 
instead  of  16  kings  and  225  years,  a  fact  which  can  be  explained 
only  on  the  assumption  that  the  eleventh  king  of  Isin  was  the 
ruling  monarch  when  the  list  was  drawn  up.  Figuring  from 
the  number  of  years  given  to  the  various  kings  of  Isin  in  list 
No.  5,  the  first  year  of  Enlil-bani,  the  eleventh  king  of  Isin, 
was  the  1 56th  year  of  the  kingdom  of  Isin,  and  it  is  thus  clear 
that  the  list  was  finished  in  the  fourth  year  of  Enlil-bani. 

A  corroboration  of  the  conclusion  that  list  No.  2  was 
written  at  the  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Isin  must  furthermore 
be  seen  in  the  fact  that  the  names  of  the  kings  of  Isin  in  this 
list  are  written  with  the  divine  determinative;  for  this  pre- 
supposes that  at  the  time  when  the  list  was  drawn  up,  the 
axiom  of  the  divine  character  of  the  kings  was  still  officially 
upheld,  which  would  not  be  the  case  had  the  kingdom  of  Isin 
already  been  overthrown,  as  we  may  see  from  No.  5,  which 
presumably  was  written  during  the  second  half  of  the  kingdom 
of  Babylon  and  therefore  designates  neither  the  kings  of  Ur 
nor  those  of  Isin  as  gods.  Compare  also  No.  3  and  the  list  of 
Scheil  where  the  names  of  the  kings  of  Agade  are  written  with- 
out the  determinative  for  god. 

As  we  see  from  the  final  summary  in  Column  10  of  No.  2, 
the  eleventh  king  of  Isin,  Enlil-bani,  was  the  i34th  king  from 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  99 

the  deluge.  The  fragment  which  is  published  as  No.  4,  however, 
counts  139  kings,  i.  e.,  five  kings  more  than  No.  2,  from  which 
it  follows  that  this  list  was  finished  during  the  reign  of  the 
sixteenth  and  last  king  of  Isin,  Damiq-ilis'u.  According  to  the 
summary,  the  year  to  which  list  No.  4  extends  was  the  32,  243d 
after  the  flood,  probably  corresponding,  as  will  be  shown  later, 
to  the  last  year  of  Damiq-ilisu.  List  No.  4,  therefore,  probably 
was  finished  67  years  later  than  No.  2. 

THE  SUMMARY  OF  DYNASTIES 

From  the  fact  that  lists  Nos.  2  and  4  date  from  the  time 
of  the  dynasty  of  Isin,  it  follows,  of  course,  that  the  other 
dynasties  enumerated  in  the  summaries  have  all  to  be  placed 
before  the  dynasty  of  Isin.  The  summary  of  No.  2,  so  far 
as  it  is  preserved,  mentions  the  following  eight  different  groups 
of  kingdoms,  which  are  here  enumerated  in  the  same  order: 

Col.    9.     4  kingdoms  of  Kis. 
5  kingdoms  of  Uruk. 
3  kingdoms  of  Ur. 
i  kingdom  of  Awan. 

i  kingdom  of [•••]• 

Rest  of  column  missing. 

Col.  10.     i  kingdom  of  Agade. 
i  kingdom  of  Gutium. 
i  kingdom  of  Isin. 

The  enumeration  corresponds  to  the  order  in  which  the 
various  cities  first  became  seats  of  kings  of  Babylonia.  This 
is  proved  for  the  kingdoms  of  Kis,  Uruk,  Ur  and  Awan  by  list 
No.  2,  which  enumerates  as  first  kingdoms  after  the  deluge: 
Kis,  Eanna,  Ur,  Awan.  Furthermore,  Akkad  precedes  Gutium 
in  the  list  because  the  kings  of  Akkad  ruled  over  Babylonia 
before  those  of  Gutium,  while  Isin,  finally,  as  the  latest  king- 
dom, is  mentioned  at  the  end  of  the  summary. 


100  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

The  summaries  of  Nos.  2  and  4  tell  us  expressly  that  alto- 
gether there  were  eleven  "cities  of  kingship,"  /.  e.,  cities  which 
at  one  time  or  other  had  been  capitals  of  a  Babylonian  kingdom; 
but  our  lists  mention  only  eight,  three  therefore  being  missing. 
One  of  them,  however,  must  have  been  Upi,  the  kings  of  which 
are  enumerated  at  the  beginning  of  Scheil's  king  list;  but  still 
we  do  not  know  how  many  dynasties  of  Upi  there  were,  and 
for  this  reason  we  are  not  able  to  give  Upi  a  definite  place  in 
our  summary.  If  we  could  be  sure  that  there  existed  only  one 
dynasty  of  this  city,  we  should  have  to  place  it  directly  before 
Agade  as  there  was  no  dynasty  between  those  of  Upi  and 
Akkad  not  already  mentioned  at  an  earlier  point  of  the  sum- 
mary; however,  as  we  shall  show  in  the  fourth  chapter,  there 
are  strong  indications  that  there  was  more  than  one  dynasty 
of  Upi,  and  in  this  case  the  city  was  probably  mentioned  before 
one  or  both  of  the  other  missing  groups  of  dynasties. 

Another  of  the  "cities  of  royalty,"  now  broken  away, 
is  evidently  Adab.  In  Chapter  VII  it  will  be  shown  that  there 
existed  a  kingdom  of  this  city  which  comprised  Babylonia 
and  the  surrounding  countries  and  which  therefore  it  would 
have  been  entirely  impossible  to  omit  from  the  list  of  kings. 
Although  we  have  no  definite  clue  to  its  age,  yet  the  probability 
is  that  it  has  to  be  placed  between  Utu-hegal  of  Uruk  and  Ur- 
Engur  of  Ur.  If,  however,  this  date  is  correct,  it  will  tpe  neces- 
sary to  assume  that  there  existed  an  earlier  kingdom  of  Adab 
even  before  the  kingdom  of  Agade,  since  the  summary  does 
not  mention  the  city  between  the  group  Akkad,  Gutium  and 
Isin  which  would  necessarily  be  the  case  if  Adab  had  become 
the  capital  of  a  Babylonian  kingdom  only  after  the  time  of 
Utu-hegal.  In  this  connection  may  be  remembered  what  has 
been  said  of  the  ruler  character  of  the  goddess  Nin-harsag, 
the  deity  of  Adab,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  our  conclusions 
concerning  the  close  connection  of  Nin-harsag  with  some 
politically  very  important  kingdom  fall  in  line  with  our  present 
conclusion  concerning  the  early  existence  of  a  powerful  kingdom 
of  Adab;  for  this,  indeed,  would  best  explain  the  rise  of  Nin- 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  101 

harsag  to  a  supreme  ruler-deity.  Moreover,  in  the  inscription 
on  the  archaic  statue  of  Lugal-da-LU,  king  of  Adab,  and  in  the 

vase  inscription  of  Me-IGI-.  .  .[ ],  likewise  king  of  Adah, 

we  have  the  proof  for  the  actual  existence  of  an  important  pre- 
Sargonic  kingdom  of  Adab,  and  taking  this  together  with  our 
previous  conclusions  we  may  indeed  regard  it  as  certain  that 
one  of  the  missing  items  in  our  summary  has  to  be  supplied 
as  two  dynasties  of  Adab. 

As  to  the  third  of  the  missing  groups  of  dynasties,  how- 
ever, we  have  no  positive  indication.  Possibly  the  city  of 
Mari  on  the  Euphrates,  northwest  of  Babylonia,  was  the  seat 
of  a  Babylonian  kingdom  for  some  time,  though  it  is  perhaps 
not  very  likely  that  a  king  or  prince  of  Mari,  after  having 
conquered  Babylonia,  would  have  continued  to  reside  in  this  city. 

Nor  is  it  possible  with  our  present  material  to  identify 
the  city  of  the  dynasty  following  that  of  Awan,  since  only  the 
beginning  of  the  first  sign  is  preserved.  This  latter  might 
perhaps  be  a  composition  of  uru  and  ud  or  the  sign  bad. 

An  important  question  finally  is  whether  in  our  summary 
the  three  missing  groups  of  dynasties  have  all  to  be  placed  in 
the  gap  between  the  dynasty  just  mentioned  and  the  kingdom 
of  Akkad,  or  whether  one  of  them  has  not  rather  to  be  placed 
before  the  kingdoms  of  Kis,  i.  e.,  at  the  head  of  the  summary. 
Judging  from  the  shape  of  fragment  No.  2  there  are  about  fif- 
teen lines  of  the  lower  portion  of  Column  1 1  missing.  As  the 
summary  usually  gives  five  lines  to  each  city,1  three  different 
groups  of  dynasties,  i.  e.,  all  of  the  missing  items  of  the  summary, 
must  have  been  contained  in  the  lower  portion  of  Column  1 1,  or 
in  other  words,  in  the  gap  before  the  dynasty  of  Akkad. 

We  arrive  at  the  same  result  by  figuring  out  the  missing 
lines  of  the  preceding  column.  The  last  partially  preserved 
line  of  Column  id'  contains  an  historical  statement  concerning 
Ur-NinIB2  and  we  have  therefore  to  assume  that  two  more 

1  The  dynasties  of  Kil  (11.  1-6)  occupy  six;  the  dynasty  in  II.  22-25.  only  four  lines. 
*  The  line  seems  to  begin  with  lu,  which  probably  began  a  relative  clause  comprising  this 
and  the  following  lines. 


102  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

lines  referred  to  the  length  of  his  reign.  Furthermore,  as  Ur- 
NinlB  is  only  the  sixth  king  of  Isin  and  as  the  tablet  counts 
eleven  kings  of  this  dynasty,  five  of  them  therefore  ruling 
after  Ur-ninIB,  we  must  assume  that  there  followed  fifteen 
more  lines,  since  we  have  to  attribute  to  each  of  the  kings 
about  three  lines  as  in  the  preserved  portion  of  Column  10. 
Three  more  lines,  finally,  have  to  be  assumed  for  a  summary 
such  as  is  attached  to  each  dynasty,  as,  e.  g.,  in  Column  314-16, 
after  the  first  dynasty  of  Ur.  As  will  be  seen  from  the  schematic 
sketch  of  the  original  tablet,  these  twenty  lines  would  carry  the 
column  to  the  same  point  as  the  fifteen  lines  at  the  end  of 
Column  1 1,  leaving  perhaps  one  blank  line  at  the  end.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  we  were  to  transfer  one  of  the  missing  groups 
of  dynasties  to  the  end  of  Column  10,  we  should  have  five  lines 
too  little  in  Column  11  and  five  lines  too  much  in  Column  10, 
making  a  difference  of  ten  lines.  From  this  it  is  evident  that 
there  was  no  group  of  dynasties  mentioned  at  the  end  of 
Column  10,  the  summary  beginning  therefore  in  line  i  of 
Column  1 1  with  the  dynasties  of  Kis.  This  fact  then  proves 
that  the  Babylonians  began  the  list  of  post-diluvian  rulers 
with  a  dynasty  of  Kis,  the  twenty-three  kings  of  which  are 
enumerated  in  the  first  two  columns  of  Nos.  2  and  3. 

As  regards  the  final  summary  of  the  list,  which  gives  the 
total  number  of  the  kings  as  well  as  the  length  of  the  whole 
period  comprised  by  their  reigns,1  it  will  be  observed  that  the 
numbers  given  in  texts  2  and  4  for  the  period  from  the  deluge 
to  the  last  king  of  the  list  do  not  completely  agree,  even  after 
making  the  necessary  allowance  for  the  five  additional  kings 
of  No.  4.  Since  list  No.  2  counts  only  134  kings,  whereas  in 
No.  4  139  are  counted,  the  latter,  No.  4,  must  necessarily  give 
a  higher  total  of  regnal  years,  and  it  is  thus  clear  that  the  first 
part  of  the  total  in  No.  4,  which  is  much  broken,  must,  exactly 

fudging  from  the  position  of  the  signs,  .t  seems  that  in  the  final  summary  of  No.  2  the 
numbers  were  introduced  by  su-nigi(n)-su-nigi(n)  "total  of  totals,"  "grand-total,"  in  contra- 
distinction to  su-nigi(n)  "total,"  which  latter  is  used  in  the  preceding  summary  of  dynasties. 
The  final  summary  of  No.  4,  on  the  other  hand,  gives  the  numbers  without  any  introductory 
phrase. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW   LISTS  OF    KINGS  103 

as  in  No.  2,  be  eight  sar,  nine  sar  being  out  of  the  question, 
as  there  is  not  sufficient  space.  The  arrangement  of  the 
signs  for  sar  in  No.  4  is  evidently  '£$%$$$§' l  instead  of 

^^x^£  in  No.  2.  After  the  eight  sar  No.  4  has  five 
ner,  seven  sos  and  twenty-three,  that  is,  3443,  the  total  number 
of  No.  4  therefore  being  32,243.  In  No.  2,  on  the  other 
hand,  there  are  preserved  after  the  eight  sar  only  one  sos  and 
sixteen,  /.  e.,  76?  and  judging  from  the  position  and  appearance 
of  the  sign  sus,  it  is  not  at  all  Jikely  that  the  beginning  of  the 
line  contained  any  further  number,  the  total  being  thus  28,876 
in  this  case.  As  compared  with  the  total  of  No.  4,  this  number 
is,  of  course,  by  far  too  low,  since  the  difference  between  the 
totals  in  Nos.  2  and  4  must  be  equal  to  the  number  of  regnal 
years  of  the  five  kings  following  Enlil-bani  of  Isin  and  the 
last  twenty  years  of  Enlil-bani  himself.  Assuming  that,  in 
comparison  with  the  number  32,243,  for  a  reason  that  will 
presently  become  clear,  the  tens  and  units  at  least,  are  correct, 
it  is  easy  to  figure  out  that  a  number  closing  with  16  could  be 
arrived  at  only  by  subtracting  67  from  32,243,  and  it  will  be 
observed  that  this  represents  the  number  of  years  of  the  last 
five  kings  of  Isin  plus  twenty  years  of  Enlil-bani,  that  is, 
exactly  the  interval  between  the  year  in  which  list  No.  2  was 
drawn  up  and  the  last  year  of  the  i3Qth,  /.  e.,  the  last  king  of 
list  No.  4.3 

With  this  reduction  then  the  actual  difference  between 
the  totals  of  Nos.  2  and  4  would  be  3300  years.  Now  it  will 
be  observed  that  in  No.  2  Col.  i3,_6,  the  statements  as  to  the 

1  Note  the  same  arrangement  in  No.  132  Col.  15,6  of  my  forthcoming  volume  of  account 
tablets  from  the  time  of  the  third  dynasty  of  Ur: 


2  If  carelessly  written  the  number  might  perhaps  have  been  intended  for  [      ]  +  600  +  6X60 
=  (x+)  960. 

3  By  adding  67  to  the  1 59  years  attributed  to  the  first  eleven  kings  of  Isin  in  No.  2  we  obtain 
226  years  for  the  whole  dynasty  of   Isin.     As  list  No.  5  gives  only  225$  years  to  the  dynasty. 
the  half  year,  perhaps  taken  together  with  fractions  of  years  from  previous  dynasties,  seems  to 
be  reckoned  as  a  full  year  in  the  final  summaries  of  our  lists. 

VOL.  IV. 


104  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

length  of  the  reigns  of  the  kings  [ ]ba  and  (7stabba  of 

the  first  dynasty  of  Kis  are  omitted,  the  tablet  leaving  merely 
a  blank  line  after  the  names;  list  No.  3  Col.  i3M5,,  on  the  other 
hand,  ascribes  to  both  kings  a  certain  period,  to  /L/5tabba, 
e.  g.,  900  years  or  more.  Assuming  that  list  No.  4  likewise 
gave  the  duration  of  the  reigns  of  the  two  kings,  the  difference 
in  the  final  summaries  would  easily  explain  itself  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  the  reigns  of  the  two  kings  above  mentioned,  and 
perhaps  of  one  or  two  others,  are  counted  in  No.  4,  while  in  the 
summary  of  No.  2  they  are  not  counted.  As  the  two  kings 
belong  to  the  first  dynasty  of  Kis,  3300  years  would  by  no 
means  be  too  high  for  the  reigns  of  two  or  a  few  more  kings, 
and  for  the  same  reason,  furthermore,  we  may  expect  that  a 
round  number  of  years  was  attributed  to  them,  so  that  indeed 
in  the  final  summary  the  tens  and  units  of  the  grand  total  may 
have  been  left  unaltered,  as  we  have  assumed  above.  Taking 
the  total  of  No.  4  as  our  basis,  the  length  of  the  period  compris- 
ing the  reigns  of  the  134  kings  of  list  No.  2  would  therefore 
be  32,176  years.  Whether  perhaps  this  number  was  given 
in  the  now  missing  portion  at  the  end  of  Col.  12  in  addition 
to  the  number  28,876,  we  cannot  say  at  present.1 

The  new  information  which  the  summaries  of  our  lists  give 
us  concerning  the  chronological  system  of  the  Babylonians 
again  confirms,  at  least  to  a  certain  extent,  the  statements  of 
Berosus  as  transmitted  to  us  in  Eusebius'  Chronicon  and  in 
the  Chronographia  of  Syncellus.  According  to  Berosus  there 
ruled  from  the  deluge  to  the  conquest  of  Babylonia  by  the 
Medes  86  kings  for  a  period  which  in  the  Armenian  version 
of  Eusebius  is  given  as  33,091  years,  in  Syncellus,  however, 
as  34,080  years.1  When  compared  with  our  new  cuneiform 
sources  it  will  at  once  be  seen  that  there  must  be  some  mistake 
in  the  figures  of  Berosus  as  transmitted  to  us,  since  king-list 

1  Syncellus  78  C:  iv  Tpioytvpi'ovs  eretrtv  KOI  8V  (variant  §'£')>  TOUT*  IOTIV  iv  (rdpois 
&  KOI  VT/pois  ft  Kcu  O-OJO-OXHS  if  (9  X  3600  +  2  X  6oo  +  8  X  60  =  34,080),  a7rep  rives 
TUV  €KK\r)<rui<TTiK!av  fj[ji.!i>v  loropiKoiv  ov  KuAuis  (read  either  ov  KUKU>«  or  /caAws)  e£cAaj8ovro 
waAiv  cis  Irif  ^AiKa  r;8'  wu  /x^vas  jj  (34,080:  360  =  94). 


A.    POEBEL — NEW   LISTS  OF    KINGS  105 

No.  4  reckons  32,243  years  for  139  kings,  while  in  Berosus 
34,080  years  are  attributed  to  86  kings  only;  we  make  here  the 
usual  observation  that  in  Greek  and  other  manuscripts  numbers 
relating  to  foreign  matters  are  very  apt  to  become  corrupt, 
unless  safeguarded  by  special  circumstances.  On  the  whole, 
however,  the  similarity  between  the  statements  of  the  cunei- 
form sources  and  the  Greek  tradition  is  very  striking,  inasmuch 
as,  according  to  both,  the  Babylonians  ascribed  a  very  long 
duration  to  the  period  extending  from  the  deluge  to  their  own 
times.  To  emend  either  the  number  86  or  the  number  34,080 
would  at  present,  of  course,  be  an  entirely  futile  undertaking, 
since  we  do  not  know  at  what  time  the  conquest  of  Babylon 
referred  to  by  Eusebius  has  to  be  placed.  Moreover,  it  will 
be  observed  that  the  Armenian  version  of  Eusebius  and  Syncellus 
are  at  variance  in  their  statements  regarding  the  role  of  the 
Medes  in  the  early  Babylonian  dynasties,  for  according  to 
Syncellus,  who  does  not  mention  the  conquest  of  Babylon  at 
all,  the  first  86  kings  of  Babylonia  were  kings  of  the  Chaldeans 
and  Medes  and  were  followed  by  a  dynasty  of  seven  Chaldean 
kings,1  while  according  to  Eusebius  they  were  Chaldeans  and 
were  followed  by  a  dynasty  of  eight  Median  kings,  a  fact  which 
evidently  indicates  that  there  must  have  been  some  confusion 
with  regard  to  this  point  in  the  source  of  Eusebius  and  Syn- 
cellus, namely,  Alexander  Polyhistor's  book  on  Chaldea.  If 
the  number  34,080  should  turn  out  to  be  correct  and  to  have 
been  computed  on  approximately  the  same  principles  as  the 
number  32,243  in  list  No.  4,  it  would  even  be  possible  to  see  in 
the  invasion  of  the  Medes  the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  the 
Persians  in  539  B.  C,  since  in  this  case  the  end  of  the  dynasty 
of  Isin  in  the  32,243d  year  after  the  deluge  would  fall  in  the 
year  2386  B.  C.,  a  date  which,  with  the  necessary  allowance 

1  Syncellus  78  C.  The  original  text  of  Syncellus  perhaps  did  not  make  Zoroaster,  who  is 
here  conceived  as  a  king  of  the  Medes,  the  eighty-fourth  king  after  the  deluge,  but  the  eighty- 
fourth  after  the  second  king  Chomasbelus,  i.  <•.,  the  last  of  the  86  kings,  so  that  the  dynasty  of 
the  seven  Chaldean  kings  would  follow  immediately  after  him  (p*r  avrov).  Do  perhaps 
Zoroaster  and  the  seven  Chaldean  kings  correspond  to  Eusebius'  eight  Median  kings? 


105  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

for  differences  in  such  calculations,  might  be  regarded  as  com- 
ing comparatively  near  the  time  when  this  event  actually 
must  have  occurred.  We  should  then,  of  course,  have  to 
assume  that  Eusebius  erroneously  referred  a  statement  of 
Alexander  Polyhistor  concerning  the  interval  between  the 
deluge  and  the  conquest  of  Babylon  in  539  to  the  period  of  the 
first  86  kings,  for  which  Berosus  then  must  have  given  a  figure 
by  several  thousands  lower  than  34,080. 

THE  SEQUENCE  OF  THE  VARIOUS  DYNASTIES 

The  last  of  the  three  dynasties  of  Ur  mentioned  in  the 
third  item  of  the  summary  is,  of  course,  identical  with  the 
well-known  dynasty  of  Ur  which  preceded  that  of  Isin;  this 
dynasty  should,  therefore,  be  known  henceforth  as  "third 
dynasty  of  Ur."  According  to  No.  5  it  comprised  five  kings 
who  ruled  1 17  years.  The  first  dynasty  or  kingdom  of  Ur,  on 
the  other  hand,  judging  from  the  fact  that  the  dynasties  of  Ur 
form  the  third  group  of  the  summary,  is  evidently  the  third 
kingdom  after  the  deluge;  according  to  No.  2,  Col.  2i-19,  it 
comprised  four  kings,  who  ruled  171  years.  Of  the  second 
kingdom  of  Ur,  however,  we  have  at  present  no  definite  trace, 
but  as  we  know  the  number  of  the  kings  and  the  length  of 
both  the  first  and  third  dynasties,  as  well  as  of  all  three  dynasties 
together,  it  will  be  found  by  mere  subtraction  that  the  second 
dynasty  numbered  four  kings  ruling  108  years.  It  may  be 
placed  either  between  the  dynasties  of  Awan  and  Upi  or  between 
Utu-hegal  of  Uruk  and  the  third  dynasty  of  Ur;  but  the  former 
possibility  is  by  far  more  likely  than  the  latter.  For  the  assign- 
ment of  the  kings  Anani  and  Lu-Nanna  to  this  dynasty  see  the 
annotations  to  the  reconstructed  list  of  kings. 

The  five  dynasties  of  Uruk  can  all  be  accounted  for  if  we 
are  correct  in  assuming  that  En-sa-kus-an-na  lugal  kalam-ma 
was  a  king  of  Uruk.  The  first,  third  and  fourth  dynasties  are 
known  from  the  king  list,  and  the  placing  of  the  fifth  imme- 
diately after  the  kingdom  of  Gutium  is  made  certain  by  the 


A.    POEBEL— NEW   LISTS  OF   KINGS  107 

fact  that  Utu-begal,  the  first  king  of  this  dynasty,  liberated 
Babylonia  from  the  yoke  of  the  Guteans.  Regarding  the 
placing  of  En-SakuS-anna  and  the  second  dynasty  of  Uruk 
after  Enbi-IStar  of  KiS  and  before  Zuzu  of  Upi  and  Eannadu 
of  Kii,  see  Chapter  IV. 

Of  the  twenty-two  kings  belonging  to  the  five  different 
dynasties  of  Uruk,  thus  far  only  fourteen  are  known.  Of  the 
missing  eight  the  greater  part  probably  belongs  to  the  first 
dynasty.  At  the  beginning  of  Column  3  of  No.  2,  which  con- 
tained the  latter  part  of  this  dynasty,  about  twenty-three  lines 
are  missing,  the  last  two  of  which,  evidently  containing  the 
words  unukl-ga  nam-lugal-bi,  belong  to  the  statement  concern- 
ing the  passing  of  the  sovereignty  from  Uruk  to  Ur;  assuming 
that  about  three  lines  are  devoted  to  each  ruler,  there  would 
be  space  for  seven  kings,  which  would  mean  six  new  ones,  since 

the  first,    -lugal,  son  of  Gilgames,   has  already  been 

counted  among  the  known  rulers.  But  a  glance  at  the  pre- 
ceding columns  shows  us  that  this  calculation  is  too  hypothetical 
to  be  made  the  basis  of  further  conclusions,  since  in  the  earlier 
part  of  our  list  two,  three  or  four  and  in  one  case  even  .eight 
lines  are  devoted  to  one  king,  so  that  possibly  only  three  or  four 
kings  have  to  be  supplied.  At  any  rate,  this  much  is  certain, 
that  in  no  case  can  we  assume  more  than  four  missing  kings 
for  the  second  and  fifth  dynasties.  It  is  possible  that  the  early 
kings  Lugal-ki-gub-ni-du-du  and  Lugal-kisal-si  who  bear  the 
titles  king  of  Uruk,  king  of  Ur,  are  to  be  assigned^  along  with 
En-sa-kus-an-na,  to  the  second  dynasty  of  Uruk,  although 
in  that  case  we  should  have  to  assume  a  considerable  political 
change  or  at  least  a  break  in  the  line  of  rulers,  within  this 
second  dynasty;  for  En-sakus-anna,  as  we  shall  see  in  Chapter 
IV,  exercised  the  enship  of  ki-en-gi,  i.  e.,  Nippur,  besides  the 
kingship  of  the  kalam,  i.  e.,  Uruk,  while  Lugal-kigub-ni-dudu 
and  Lugal-kisal-si  ruled  as  kings  over  Uriik  and  Ur.  Never- 
theless, such  a  break  is  quite  conceivable,  since  we  observe  a 
similar  change  from  one  ruling  family  to  another,  e.  g.,  in  the 
kingdom  of  Akkad  and  the  kingdom  of  I  sin;  on  the  whole, 


108  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

however,  it  would  seem  more  likely  that  the  two  kings  have 
to  be  assigned  to  another  dynasty. 

Of  the  four  dynasties  of  Kis  only  two  are  known  to  us 
from  the  king  lists,  namely,  the  first  which  lies  entirely  in  the 
legendary  period  immediately  after  the  deluge,  and  that  founded 
by  Queen  Ku-Bau.  At  least  one  of  the  missing  dynasties 
has  to  be  placed  before  that  last  mentioned,  since  the  existence 
of  a  mighty  Babylonian  kingdom  of  Kis  in  early  historical 
times  is  proved  by  the  references  to  King  Mesilim  in  the  in- 
scriptions of  Eannadu  and  Entemena,  as  well  as  by  his  own 
inscriptions  found  at  Adab  and  Telloh.  As  Eannadu  himself 
has  to  deal  with  a  king  of  Dpi,  and  furthermore,  as  he  renews 
the  kingdom  of  Kis  after  the  conquest  of  Upi,  we  have  appar- 
ently to  assume  a  sequence  of  kingdoms,  Kis... — Upi — Kis, 
which  means  that  we  have  to  place  two,  /.  e.,  all  of  the  missing 
dynasties  of  Kis,  between  the  first  kingdom  of  Kis  and  that 
founded  by  Ku-Bau,  or  in  other  words,  in  the  gap  between  the 
kingdom  of  Awan  and  the  kingdom  of  Upi  which  heads  Scheil's 
list  of  kings.  Quite  in  accordance  with  this  conclusion,  further- 
more, is  the  fact  that  we  know  a  comparatively  large  number 
of  early  kings  of  Kis,  while  there  is,  at  least  at  the  present,  no 
evidence  for  the  existence  of  a  kingdom  of  Kis  from  the  time 
of  Utu-hegal  to  the  period  immediately  before  the  kingdom  of 
Babylon. 

To  the  earlier  of  the  two  missing  dynasties  of  Kis  we  have 
likewise  to  assign  Enbi-Istar,  since  he  is  a  contemporary  of 
En-3akus-anna  who,  for  palaeographical  reasons1,  has  to  be 
placed  before  Eannadu.  It  will  be  observed  that  Enbi-Istar's 
name  is  Semitic,  while  Me-silim's  name  is  evidently  Sumerian, 
or  at  least  non-Semitic;  this  fact  need,  however,  by  no  means 
point  to  a  change  of  the  ruling  family,  since  we  notice  the  same 
change  in  names  between  Ur-Engur  and  Dungi  of  Ur  and  their 
successors  AMAR-Sin,  SU-Sin,  Ibi-Sin,  and  between  Ur-NinIB 
of  Isin  and  his  son  Bur-Sin. 

»See  Chapters  III  and  IV. 


Coi.   12 


RECONSTRUCTED  SCHEME  OF  THE   RI.VI.RSE  OF  THE   LIST  OF 
KINGS  PUBLISHED  AS  No.  2 


Coi.   10 


COL.  9 


Coi.   6 


Cot.   7 


A.    POEBEL  —  NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS 


Whether  there  were  kings  of  KiS  immediately  after  Eannada, 
and  whether  these  kings  were  his  successors  in  the  hegemnin 
over  Babylonia,  so  that  they  were  mentioned  in  the  king  list, 
is  not  certain,  though  it  is  likely,  since  in  the  latter  part  of  his 
narrative  Eannadu  mentions  KiS  before  Upi,  which  seems  to 
indicate  that  the  leadership,  at  least  in  the  North,  fell  to  Ki§, 
not  to  Upi.  Of  other  north-Babylonian  cities  only  Mari  could 
be  taken  into  account  as  a  state  of  sufficient  power  to  assume 
the  hegemony  over  Babylonia  at  that  time;  but  the  fact  that 
this  city  is  mentioned  as  the  last  of  Eannadu's  opponents,  seems 
rather  to  suggest  that  it  played  only  the  part  of  an  ally  to  KiS, 
not  that  of  the  leading  power  of  Babylonia. 

Of  the  fifty-one  (or  perhaps  only  forty-one)  kings  attributed 
to  the  four  dynasties  of  Kis  by  the  summary  of  No.  2,  twenty- 
three,  according  to  No.  3,  belong  to  the  first  dynasty,  and  eight, 
according  to  Scheil's  list,  to  the  fourth,  so  that  no  more  than 
twenty  (or  ten)  have  to  be  attributed  to  the  second  and  third 
dynasties.  Of  these  again  five  are  known  from  inscriptions, 
so  that  only  the  names  of  fifteen  (or  five)  kings  are  missing. 

Regarding  the  sequence  of  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty 
only  this  much  can  be  said,  that  Enbi-IStar  is  probably  the 
last  king  of  this  second  dynasty,  the  hegemony  evidently  pass- 
ing to  En-sakus-anna  after  Enbi-Istar's  capture. 

For  the  dynasties  after  Isin  and  the  relation  of  the  Isin 
dynasty  to  that  of  Babylon,  see  later. 


110  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM— BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


ANNOTATIONS   TO  THE    KINGS 

For  the  possible  identification  of  this  king  with 


LAL-ur-alim-ma  of  Nippur  see  Chapter  I. 

Aaw^o?  iroip-qv.  For  the  designation  "shepherd"  compare 
Etana  siba  and  dLugal-banda  siba. 

'A/A6/on/ai>o9.  The  proposed  identification  of  this  king  with 
the  reputed  Amel-Sin,  the  "abkallu  of  Ur,"1  who  is  mentioned 
in  the  colophon  of  K  8o8o,2  is,  at  present  at  least,  out  of  question, 
because  the  latter's  name  is  lu-dnanna,  and  not  awil-dsin. 
Nevertheless,  the  identification  is  not  altogether  impossible, 
because  in  a  Semitic  version  of  the  old  traditions  Lu-Nanna 
may  have  appeared  under  a  translated  name,  as  indeed  is 
the  case  with  Zi-u-GID-du;  on  the  whole,  however,  this  is 
not  very  likely,  since  Lu-Nanna,  for  aught  we  know,  prob^ 
ably  did  not  figure  in  a  story  of  such  popularity  as  the  deluge 
story,  nor  does  his  name  seem  to  have  been  as  characteristic 
of  the  contents  of  the  story  told  about  him  as  was  Zi-u-GID-du's 
name  with  regard  to  the  deluge  story,  so  as  to  warrant  its 
translation  into  Akkadian. 

Eio-oufl/oos,3  2un0pos,4  [w]a-at-ra-am-ha-si-is,6  at-ra-ha-sis,6 
a-tar-PI(  =  hasis),7  Sccrvlqs  (or  Sio-vtfeus),8  u-ta-na-(p)is-tim,9 
ut-ZI(  =  napistim),10  zi-u-GID-du,11  zi-SU-da,12 


.   l  Zimmern,  Beitrage,  p.  152,  note  3. 

2Cf.  Bezold,  Catalogue,  p.  893:  ni-sir-ti  lu-dnanna  NUN-ME  uriw. 

3  Eusebius,  Chronicon,  quoting  from  Alexander  Polyhistor's  remarks  on  Berosus'  book  on 
Chaldea  and  from  Abydenus'  "History  of  the  Chaldeans"  (Syncellus  and  Armenian  version). 

*  Eusebius,  Chronicon,  quoting  from  Abydenus'  "History  of  the  Chaldeans"  (Syncellus  and 
Armenian  version);  variants  tricrovS/aos  and  £uriOpo<;. 

5  Old-Babylonian  fragment,  Morgan  135  Col.  8  (=  Scheil,  RT  20,  p.  55  ff). 

•Gilg.  Ep.  X\m. 

7CT  13,  49  (K  3399+  K  3934). 

8  Name  of  the  hero  of  the  deluge  story  in  Hierapolis,  Lucian,  De  Syria  Dea  12;  as  Prof. 
Zimmern  suggested  to  me  by  letter,  Sisythes  may  perhaps  be  identical  with  the  Sumerian 
zi-SO-da,  zi-u-GID-du  and  not  with  Xisuthros. 

9  VAT  4105  (MVG  VII  pp.  4  and  5),  Col.  4«.(13). 

10  Gilg.  Ep.  IX,  Col.  ig  Iut-napiitim  marIubara-dtu-tu;   X  Col.  22g,  523.24,  XIi,*,  etc. 
"HGTNo.  i. 

12  CT  18,  30  Col.  4,. 

13  Josephus  in  Apionem  i,  19  (remarks  on  Berosus,  book  on  Babylonia). 


A.    I'OEBEL— NEW    LISTS  Oh    KINGS  111 

Ga-lu-mu-um,1  ka-lu-mu-um2  =  qalumum,  "young  animal," 
especially  "young  lamb."3 

Zu-ga-gi-ib,4  zu-ga-ki-ib5  =  zuqaqibum,  "scorpion."  Did  the 
king  perhaps  figure  in  a  legend  which  in  some  way  dealt  with 
the  scorpion,  the  king  perhaps  being  changed  into  a  scorpion 
by  an  angry  deity?6  It  will  be  noted  that  the  names  Qalumum, 

Zuqakib  and  the  broken bum  (No.  2  Col.  ir.)  are  Semitic, 

which  fact,  however,  does  not  exclude  the  possibility  that 
originally  the  legends  and  tales  concerning  these  kings  were 
told  in  Sumerian,  in  which  case  the  present  Semitic  names 
would  simply  be  translations  from  Sumerian.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  equally  possible  that  these  tales  originated  among 
the  Semites;  this  much,  at  any  *-ate,  is  certain  that,  when 
our  lists  were  first  drawn  up,  the  Semitic  names  were  those 
with  which  the  Babylonians  of  that  time  were  familiar. 

Ar-pi,7  ar-pi-u,8  ar-bu-um,9  son  of  a  muSkinu.  The  latter 
designation,  if  correct,  would  presuppose  a  story  relating  how 
Arpi,  despite  his  lowly  birth,  rose  to  the  position  of  ruler  over 
Babylonia;  compare  for  a  similar  motive  the  story  of  Irra- 
imitti  and  the  gardener  Enlil-bani,  the  later  king  of  Isin.  Instead 
of  the  usual  masenda  =  muskinum  which  we  read  in  No.  3  Col. 
iir,  No.  2  Col.  iir  has  only  mas-da.  This  latter  is  likewise 
equated  with  muskmum  in  CT  12,  i64ib;  nevertheless,  if  the 
writing  mas-da  should  be  more  correct  than  masenda,  we  may 
here  very  well  have  the  word  mas-da  "gazelle,"  which  might 
be  the  name  of  one  of  the  Babylonian  heroes.  According  to 

1  No.  3  Col.  i7'. 

•  No.  5  Col.  i9'. 

'The  writing  ga-lu-mu-um  in  No.  3  proves  that  the  word  began  with  q.  not  with  k,  as 
Delitzsch,  AHW  p.  333,  assumes;  the  same  root  is  found  in  qa-al-mu  which  in  2  R  3^41  «.t  i* 
given  as  one  of  the  synonyms  for  siljru  "small,"  "young." 

4  No.  2  Col.  i?;  No.  3  Col.  \v. 

'  No.  5  Col.  i  n». 

6  Cf.  the  passage  Gilg.  Ep.  VIM_6j  according  to  which  IStar  turned  a  shepherd  into  a  jackal 
and  11.  64-78  where  she  turned  the  gardener  ISullanu  into  arfallalu.     Evidently  such  metamor- 
phoses were  a  favorite  theme  in  Babylonian  legends  as  in  those  of  any  other  nation. 

7  No.  2  Col.  in.;  perhaps  ar-wi. 

•  No.  5  Col.  IH.;  perhaps  ar-wi-u. 

•  No.  3  Col.  in/. 


112  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

CT  12,  i639b  mas-da  is  a  byname  of  Ne-unu-gal;  according 
to  CT  n,  4024,  of  Lugal[-gir-ra],  and  according  to  CT  n,  4O23, 
of  Mes-lam-ta-e-a;  but  it  is  by  no  means  likely  that  the  mas-da 
in  our  lists  refers  to  this  deity,  since  in  that  case  it  would  be 
written  with  the  sign  for  god,  quite  apart  from  the  fact  that 
we  should  expect  a  more  common  name,  such  perhaps  as 
dne-unu-gal,  since  the  designation  mas-da  is  evidently  used  only 
in  poetical  language. 

E-ta-na,1  de-ta-na,2  is  the  hero  of  the  well-known  Etana 
epic  as  may  be  seen  from  the  first  of  the  two  historical  refer- 
ences attached  to  his  name  in  our  lists.  It  will  be  noted  that 
the  verb  "to  ascend"  is  e(d)  in  Sumerian,  and  we  may  there- 
fore ask  whether  Etana's  name  itself  does  not  perhaps  allude 
to  the  tradition  that  he  ascended  to  Heaven,  the  name  being 
perhaps  a  compound  of  ed  "the  ascender"  and  anna  "of  Heaven." 

From  the  second  historical  reference  we  learn  that  Etana 
was  credited  with  having  ruled  over  all  the  lands  or,  in  other 
words,  over  the  whole  world,  probably  being  considered  the 
first  of  the  great  Babylonian  conquerors.  The  assumption 
that  in  the  Etana  epic  the  gods  select  the  child  born  by  Etana's 
wife  as  king  over  the  human  race  must  therefore  be  given  up, 
Etana  himself  without  any  doubt  being  the  chosen  ruler.  Of 
course,  there  is  still  the  difficulty  that  the  ruler  for  whom  the 
gods,  according  to  this  epic,  are  searching,  is  apparently  the 
first  king;  how  this  can  be  harmonized  with  the  tradition  that 
the  kingship  was  established  at  the  time  of  the  creation,  it  is 
difficult  to  say  for  the  present  lack  of  material;  possibly  this 
epic  reflects  an  independent  tradition  concerning  the  establish- 
ment of  kingship,  unless  perhaps  the  previous  rulers  may  have 
been  considered  as  patriarchs  rather  than  real  kings. — It  will  be 
noted  that  in  the  fragment  K  26o626fr,  re'u  "shepherd"  and  sarru 
"king"  are  used  as  synonyms  and  that  in  our  list  Etana  is  called 
a  shepherd;  nevertheless,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  latter 
designation  refers  to  Etana's  original  vocation,  just  as  Lugal- 


1  Nos.  2,  3  and  5;   old-Babylonian  Etana  epic. 
*  Assyrian  Etana  epic. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  113 

handa  according  to  our  list  was  originally  a  shepherd  and 
Dumuzi  a  hunter  (or  fisherman).  A  corroboration  of  this 
assumption  may  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  in  the  Etana  epic  the 
eagle  and,  to  some  extent,  the  snake  play  so  important  a  part, 
features  which  fit  very  well  in  the  milieu  of  a  shepherd  tale. 

In  the  Assyrian  fragments  of  the  Etana  epic  the  hero's 
name  is  preceded  by  the  determinative  for  god;  in  Scheil's 
old-Babylonian  fragment,  however,  as  well  as  in  our  lists,  this 
determinative  is  not  found.  These  writings  reflect  the  fact 
that  Etana,  like  ZiugzWdu,  Lugal-banda,  Dumuzi  and  Gil- 
games,  was  originally  a  mortal  and  was  taken  into  the  number 
of  the  gods  only  at  a  later  period  of  his  life.  It  may  be  noted 
in  this  connection  that  Gilgames,  according  to  Column  4  of 
the  second  tablet  of  the  epic,  dreams  that  he  entered  the  nether 
world — the  bit  ipri — and  saw  there  the  kings  of  old,  the  high 
priests  and  the  other  priests  of  the  great  gods  as  well  as  Etana1 
and  dGIR,  Eres-kigal  and  Belit-seri,  the  scribe  of  the  nether 
world.  We  see  from  this  passage  that  Etana  was  believed  to 
have  become  a  god  of  the  nether  world,  for  it  is  for  this  reason 
that  among  all  the  ancient  rulers  he  alone  is  mentioned  by 
name  and  associated  with  the  chthonian  gods.  It  will  be  noted 
that  the  passage  just  referred  to  and  the  king  lists  presuppose 
the  same  chronology,  at  least  in  so  far  as  both  of  them  assume 
that  Etana  lived  on  earth  before  the  time  of  Gilgames'. 

H^a-li-x,2  fo-li-x,3  AN-ILLA(D).4  The  reading  of  the  name 
is  very  doubtful.  Is  this  son  of  Etana  identical  with  the  child 
born  by  the  latter's  wife  according  to  the  Etana  epic? 

En-me-mm-na,5  en-men-nun-na.6  Note  that  in  CT  14, 
918b  dumu  en-me-nun-na,  apparently  the  name  of  an  animal  or 
insect,  is  rendered  mar  ad-mu-m[u],  and  that  the  preceding  line 
mentions  an  insect  nim-ia-nun-na  "butter-fly"  =  a-da-mu-mu, 

1  Written  without  the  determinative  for  god. 

2  No.  2  Col.  1 17. 

3  No.  5  Col.  1 13. 

4  K  8532  Col.  21,  according  to  King's  copy,  SEH  III,  p.  143. 

5  No.  2  Col.    I20.23.2P 

fi  K8532  Col.  22. 


114  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

which  CT  14,  10  is  translated  zumbu  a-da-mu-mu.  Whether 
this  connection  of  the  name  Enmenunna  with  Nimi(a)nunna 
is  original  or  due  to  popular  etymology,  it  is  at  present  impos- 
sible to  decide.  Regarding  the  element  nunna  cf.  the  names 
bar-sal-nun-na,  mes-ki-ag-nun-na ;  from  the  latter,  it  follows 
that  nunna  is  the  genitive  of  nun  "the  great  one"  or  as  superla- 
tive "the  highest,"  which,  like  the  Hebrew  'elion,  is  used  as 
the  name  of  a  deity;  for  mes-kiag-nunna  can  hardly  be  trans- 
lated other  than  "the  beloved  hero  of  the  Highest."  According 
to  CT  12,  i8b  (93041)8.11  nun  "the  highest"  is  a  designation 
for  each  of  the  four  highest  gods,  Anu,  Enlil,  Ea  and  Sin;  cf. 
also  2  R  3i25e,  nun  |  de-a.  En-me-nunna  should  therefore  be 
translated  "the  oracle(?)  lord  of  the  Highest,"  en-men-nun-na 
"the  crown  lord  of  the  Highest."  For  en-me  as  designation 
of  a  special  kind  of  high  priest  cf.,  e.  g.,  en-me-dinnanna 
(pronounced  u-ku-ur-rim)  =  e-nu  sa  distar  82,  8-I61  Obv.i8; 
en-me-lagar  (pronounced  mu-ru-ub)  =  e-nu  sa  dla-GAR-bu, 
ibid.,  Obv.  20;  en-me-a-ku  (pronounced  se-en-nu)  =  e-nu  sa 
de-a,  ibid.,  Obv.  19,  and  the  name  of  the  seventh  prediluvian 
king  en-me-dur-an-ki  "the  oracle(?)  lord  of  Duranki  (i.  e.,  the 
link  of  Heaven  and  earth). "' 

Me-lam-kis(i)ki,3  m^-lam-kis(i)kn,4  "splendor  of  Kis."  The 
fact  that  the  second  component  of  this  name  is  the  name  of 
the  city  of  Kis  may  be  regarded  as  a  corroboration  of  the  assign- 
ment of  the  first  twenty-three  kings  after  the  deluge  to  a  dynasty 
of  Kis.  The  writing  me-lam-kis(i)kl  is  perhaps  only  due  to  a 
slip  of  the  copyist;  however,  one  of  the  Sumerian  values  of 
the  sign  a  is  indeed  me. 

Bar-SAL-nun-na,  "the  of  the  Highest."  Bar 

seems  to  occur  as  an  equivalent  of  lugal  "king,"  "ruler,"  in 

1  Smith,  Miscl.  Texts,  25-26;  CT.  n,  49,  50. 

2  Cf.  also  en-me-Ll  (pronounced  ensi)   =  Sa'ilu,  en-me-haldim  (pronounced  en-di-ib)  and 
en-me-gi  (pronounced  en-gi-ma),  both  =  nu-ha-dim-mu;  this  latter  word,  by  the  way,  evidently 
originated  from  enmehaldim  =  enue|)a1dim.     According  to  CT  24,  428,27  the  father  gods  Enki 
and  Ninki  were  high  priests  of  the  universe,  as  their  names  den-me-sar-ra  and  dnin-me-5ar-ra 
indicate. 

»  No.  2  Col.  Ijy. 

*  K  8532  Obv.  Col. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  11.5 

the  inscription  of  Utu-hegal,  RA  1911  p.  ..,  and  in  the  letter 
in  Langdon,  Liturgies  VH. 

Mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir,  son  of  Samas'.  As  the  historical  ref- 
erences attached  to  his  name  show,  this  king  was  the  hero 
of  a  legend  relating  how  he  entered  or  descended  into  some- 
thing which  unfortunately  is  broken  away,  probably  into  the 
nether  world,  and  how  likewise  he  ascended  to  something  which 
again  is  broken  away.  In  some  respects  the  latter  of  these 
statements  concerning  Mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir  may  perhaps  remind 
us  of  Phaethon,  the  son  of  Apollo,  who  attempted  to  drive  his 
father's  chariot  across  the  sky,  though  Mes-kingas'er  evidently 
was  more  successful  in  his  enterprise  than  Phaethon.  It  will 
be  noted  that  we  have  here  the  first  instance  of  the  belief  that 
one  of  the  great  gods  engendered  a  mortal  son;  of  course,  this 
presupposes  another  legend  relating  that  Samas  loved  a  mortal 
woman  who  bore  him  this  son.  The  fact  that  the  Babylonians 
pictured  Mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir  as  one  of  their  great  heroes  is  indi- 
cated by  his  very  name  the  first  element  of  which  is  mes  "hero," 
found  also  in  the  name  of  the  other  great  hero  GlS-BIL-ga-mes, 
as  well  as  in  the  names  of  Mes-za?-me?-DU?,  Mes-anni-pada, 
Mes-kiag-nunna. 

According  to  our  list  Meskingaser  is  high  priest  and  king 
of  Eanna,  i.  e.,  the  temple  and  sacred  precinct  of  An  and  IStar, 
not  king  of  Uruk.  Compare  also  the  preceding  statement  that 
the  kingdom  of  Kis  passed  to  Eanna.  The  city  of  Uruk  was 
apparently  not  supposed  to  have  existed  at  that  time,  at  least 
it  became  the  seat  of  the  ruler  only  under  Meskingaser's  son. 
This  tradition  of  the  hierocratic  origin  of  the  kingdom  of  Uruk 
easily  explains  why  in  historical  times,  e.  g.,  during  the  third 
kingdom  of  Ur,  the  high  priest  of  Uruk  plays  so  important  a 
part,  his  investiture  being  mentioned  several  times  in  the  date 
formulas  as  the  most  important  event  of  the  year,  and  it  will  be 
noted  that  even  kings  bore  the  title  En  of  Uruk  or  en  of  the 
land  of  Uruk  as,  e.  g.,  Lugal-zaggisi1  and  Lugal-kigub-nidudu.2 

1  No.  32,  Column  10  at  the  beginning. 
1  Vase  A,  9unuki-ga  10nam-en  mu-(5)a-ge. 


116  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

^ugal-ban-da,1  lu^al-ban-da,2  figures  as  the  hero  of  a  legend 
dealing  with  the  theft  of  the  tablets  of  fate  by  the  bird-god 
Zu  from  the  palace  of  Enlil.  While  none  of  the  gods  dared 
make  an  attempt  to  recover  them  from  the  thief  who  by  their 
possession  exercised  supreme  power  over  the  world,  the  shepherd 
Lugal-banda  recovered  them  evidently  by  playing  a  trick  on 
the  bird-god  and  his  wife  whom  he  had  invited  to  a  sumptuous 
feast.  We  must  then  conclude  that  in  recognition  of  this  deed 
Enlil  made  him  king  of  Uruk  and  even  a  god,  as  which  he  was 
worshipped  to  the  latest  periods  of  Babylonian  history.  Note 
that  in  No.  18  Lugal-banda's  name  is  not  written  with  the 
determinative  -for  god,  evidently  because  at  that  juncture  of 
the  narrative  he  was  still  a  mere  mortal.3  As  the  king  list 
and  the  epic  show,  Lugal-banda  is,  of  course,  not  identical  with 
Enlil,  nor  is  he  a  different  aspect  of  this  deity.4  It  is  true,  that 
in  5  R  46,  i,  Obv.  27,  the  star  mul-DAR-LUGAL  is  rendered 
den-lil  sa  kullabkl  dlugal-ban-da;  but  this  may  prove  at  the 
most  that  Lugal-banda,  despite  the  fact  that  he  was  not  one 
of  the  great  gods,  played  the  role  of  Enlil  within  the  precincts 
of  Kullab,  a  privilege  which  the  theologians  may  have  claimed 
for  him  as  a  reward  for  the  service  he  rendered  Enlil  in  recover- 
ing the  tablets  of  fate.  Note  that  in  the  same  manner  Marduk, 
Sin  and  Samas  appear  in  the  role  of  Enlil  without  being  in  the 
least  identical  with  him.5  The  city  of  Kullab,  mentioned  in 
the  passage  just  quoted,  must  have  been  situated  in  the  imme- 
diate neighborhood  of  Uruk;6  according  to  our  list  the  father 
of  Gilgames  was  the  high  priest  of  Kullab,  and  this  perhaps 

1  No.  169;  No.  2010;  4  R  14. 

2  No.  18,. 

3  In  the  late   Assyrian   duplicate  4  R  14,   ii,  however,  the  divine   predicate  is  given   him 
at  the  very  start  of  the  narrative. 

4  Suggested  by  Jensen,  KB  Vh,  p.  370;  taken  for  certain   by   Weber  in  "Die  Literatur 
der  Babylonier  und  Assyrer,"  p.  66. 

5  Cf.,  e.  g.,  Marduk  =  den-lil  kalam-ma-na,  and  names  like  Sama5-denlil-ilt,  etc.     Possibly 
the  star  is  only  a  common  designation  for  Enlil  of  Kullab  and  Lugalbanda,  though  in  this  case 
a  division  sign  between  the  two  names  might  be  expected. 

6  Note  that  in  the  inscription  of  Utu-hegal,  Col.  34.*  the  inhabitants  of  Uruk  and  Kullab 
are  mentioned  together:  "durnu  unukl-ga  6dumu  kul-abakl-ka. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  117 

explains  that  according  to  Gilg.  Ep.  VI192  Lugal-ban-da  is  the 
special  patron  god  of  Gilgames'  to  whom  he  dedicates  the  oil 
gained  from  the  horns  of  the  heavenly  bull.1  It  will  be  observed 
that  the  Gilgames  epic  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the  chronology 
of  the  list  of  kings  in  that  it  presupposes  that  Lugal-banda's 
earthly  days  lay  before  the  time  of  Gilgames'. 

According  to  the  list  of  gods  2  R  59  Rev.  24,  252,  the  goddess 
dnin-sun,  in  Eme-SAL  dgasan-sun,  was  the  wife  of  Lugal-banda; 
both  deities  are,  therefore,  worshipped  in  a  common  temple 
at  Uruk,  according  to  the  "clay  nail"  inscription  of  King  Sin- 
gasid,  CT  21,  15-17,  namely,  in  the  e-ki-kal  (e-kankal)  which 
Sin-gasid  built  or  restored  for  them.  On  the  relation  of  Ninsun 
to  the  city  of  Kullab  see  later  under  Gilgames,  whose  mother 
she  is  according  to  the  inscription  of  Utu-hegal  and  the  Gilgames 
epic. 

The  historical  epic,  No.  20  and  its  duplicate  No.  21,  which 
deals  with  events  of  Lugal-banda's  and  Dumu-zi's  time,  is 
unfortunately  too  fragmentary  to  give  us  definite  information; 
but  we  see  at  least  that  it  dealt  among  other  subjects  with  the 
conquest  and  destruction  of  the  city  of  HA-Akl,  with  the 
restoration  (?)  by  Lugal-banda  of  another  destroyed  city,  with 
certain  events  at  Eridu  and  Ur,  and  finally,  with  wars  against 
Elam  "below,"  Halma  "above"  and  Tidnum  in  the  west.  The 
latter  information  is  of  importance,  because  it  shows  that  Elam, 
Halma  and  Tidnum  are  the  names  of  the  peoples  who  in  pre- 
historic times  lived  to  the  east,  north  and  west  of  Babylonia. 
From  Rev.,  1.  14,  it  appears  that  Elam  is  here  mentioned  for 
the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Babylonia,  at  least  as  invader  of 
the  Tigris-Euphrates  country.  Tidnum  is  well  known  from 
the  name  of  the  fortress  Muri^-Tidnim  which  SU-Sin  of  Ur, 
according  to  the  date  formula  of  his  fifth  year,  built  in  Martu.3 

1  6  gur  §amni  si-hit  ki-la-li-e  a-na  hiS-Sa-ti  ili-Su  dlugal-ban-da  i-ki$. 

2dUmun-ban-da  [dlu]gal-ban-da  $U-ma 
''gaSan-sun          ''[ni]n-sun  dam-Su"1'  sal 

3  The  name  of  the  fortress  cannot  be  Martu-murik-Tidnim  on  account  of  the  abbreviation 
of  the  formula  to  mu  bad-mar-tu(kl)  ba-du  (RT  18,  p.  71  and  date  list)  and  because  mar-tu,  which 
in  this  case  would  be  the  name  of  the  god,  should  be  written  with  the  determinative  for  god. 


118  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

From  the  equation  ti-id-nu  GlR-GlR1  |  a-mur-ru-u  we  see 
that  Tidnum  is  the  name  of  the  people  that  inhabited  the  later 
Amurru  country;  but  as  the  determinative  ki  in  2  R  5O59c 
kur-tidnukl  |  mat  a-mur-ri-e  indicates,  Tidnum  is  used  also  to 
designate  the  country  inhabited  by  this  people.2  At  the  time 
of  Gudea  the  name  Ti-DA-num3  which  evidently  is  identical 
with  Tidnum,  is  confined  to  a  certain  mountainous  district 
of  Amurru,  but  whether  this  can  be  taken  as  an  indication 
that  this  district  was  the  original  seat  of  the  people  we  do  not 
know;  perhaps  the  name  clung  to  the  mountains,  because  they 
were  the  last  stronghold  of  the  people  of  Tidnum  against  the 
onset  of  the  Martu,4  who  appear  in  the  West-land  for  the  first 
time,  as  far  as  we  know,  at  the  time  of  the  kings  of  Agade. 

dDumu-zi.  This  king  is  the  well-known  god  Dumu-zi, 
the  husband5  of  the  goddess  I  star.  According  to  our  king 
list,  Dumu-zi  was  originally  a  SU-KUAGUNU,  i.  e.,  either  a 
hunter  or  a  fisherman.  As  we  see  from  Gilg.  Ep.  VI,  1.  46* 
the  goddess  Istar  fell  in  love  with  him,  but  whether  this  hap- 
pened when  Dumu-zi  was  still  a  hunter,  or  after  he  had 
become  king  of  Uruk,  is  not  known.  From  Gilgames'  words 
that  she  "decreed  a  yearly  wailing"  for  him,  it  follows  that 
the  goddess'  love  proved  fatal  for  him  and  that  he  met  with  a 
premature  death;  however,  we  do  not  yet  know  whether  Istar 
killed  her  husband  or  was  in  some  indirect  way  the  innocent 


1  In  2  R  4812,,  the  sign  is  written 

3  Cf.  the  use  of  Gutium,  Elam,  etc.,  for  people  and  country. 

3  Statue  B  6    13ti-DA-num  14har-sag-mar-tu-ta,  etc.  Ti-DA-num  is  probably  ti-ld-num. 

4  Or  perhaps  against  a  people  inhabiting  the  Amurru  country  before  the  Martu. 
6  Mu-UT-na  =  ha-me-ru,  hawiru,  ha'iru  "husband,"  "lover?" 

6  46Ana  ddumu-zi  ha-mi-ri  .  .  .  .[  ......  ]-ri-ti-ki  47Iat-ta  a-na  Sat-ti  bi-tak-ka-a  tal-li-mes-Su. 

A  translation  "Buhle  deiner  Jugend,"  etc.  (Jensen  KB  Viz)  is  here  as  well  as  in  Istar's  descent 
into  Hades,  Rev.  47  (ddumu-zi  ha-mir  §i-ih-ru[-ti-!a])  not  very  well  possible,  since  Dumu-zi 
was  the  immediate  predecessor  of  Gilgames'  and  thus  lived  about  450,000  years  after  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world,  whereas  IStar's  birth  doubtless  has  to  be  placed  before  the  time  of  creation. 
We  have  therefore  probably  to  translate  "thy  youthful  husband"  (Jensen,  1.  c.,  p.  404).     The 
enumeration  of  the  six  lovers  of  Istar  no  doubt  follows  the  inverted  chronological  order,  the 
first  lover  being  her  father's  gardener  Isullanu,  the  second,  etc.,  the  shepherd  Tabulu(?)  or 
Utullu  ("Shepherd"),  SisQ  ("Horse"),  Nesu  ("Lion"),  Allallu  (the  variegated  "  .......  bird") 

and  the  last  Dumu-zi. 


A.    POEBEL— NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  119 

cause  of  his  death.  At  any  rate  her  grief  after  his  death  was 
excessive,  and  in  order  to  bring  him  back  from  the  dead  she 
herself  descended  into  Hades,  as  we  read  in  the  well-known 
epic.  There  she  herself  is  kept  a  prisoner  by  EreS-kigal  who 
possibly,  like  Istar,  is  in  love  with  Dumu-zi,1  until  the  gods, 
alarmed  at  the  changes  wrought  in  nature  by  her  absence, 
sent  UDDUsu-namir  to  the  nether  world  to  enforce  her  liber- 
ation. This  he  achieves  and  eventually  when  IStar  refuses  to 
be  freed,  we  may  suppose  he  also  restores  Dumu-zi  to  life, 
together  with  whom  IStar  then  returns  to  the  upper  world.* 
It  seems  that  from  that  time  the  rescued  god  lived  in  the 
heavenly  palace  of  Anu,  for  in  the  Adapa  legend  Adapa  meets 
Dumu-zi  and  Gis-zi-da  in  the  gate  of  Anu's  palace,  and  when 
Adapa  appears  before  Anu,  these  two  gods  intercede  for  him. 
It  will  be  noted  that  Adapa  affects  to  be  sorry  for  the  previous 
disappearance  of  the  two  gods  from  the  earth,  from  which  it 
follows  that  in  the  chronological  system  of  the  Babylonians 
the  Adapa  legend  has  to  be  assigned  to  the  time  of  one  of  the 
successors  of  Dumu-zi.  According  to  Utu-hegal's  inscription 
Column  229-3i,3  as  well  as  other  passages,4  Dumu-zi  is  the  AMA- 
Usumgal  of  Anu,5  and  it  is  evidently  in  this  capacity  that  he 
"pronounces  the  fate"  of  Utu-hegal,  as  we  read  in  the  latter's 
inscription.6 

The  father  of  Dumu-zi  is  the  god  dnin-gis-zi-da,  in  Eme- 
SAL  (d)umun-mu(s)-zi-da,  as  is  shown  by  the  designation  of 


1  Cf.  in  Greek  mythology  the  rape  of  Persephone  by  Hades.  To  Dumu-zi's  sojourn  in  the 
nether  world  as  the  lover  of  Ere5-kigal  evidently  refers  the  title  u-mu-un-e  a-ra-li  CT  15,  18*. 
umun  a-ra-li  4  R  27,  Us. 

'This  explanation  seems  to  solve  the  difficulty  presented  by  the  passage  in  IStar's  descent 
to  Hades,  Rev.  47.58. 

'Nin-mu  "innanna  28a-dab-mu-um  29<1dumu-zi  ^ama-uSumgal-an-na-ge  81nam-mu  bf-du. 

4  CT  16,  46195;  SBH  6719;  13619;  2  R  546<g  =  CT  24,  19  Col.  2t;  CT  24,  gn;  4  R,  30,  2»(,»;  »b. 

6  Or  does  an-na  mean  "high"?  The  meaning  and  reading  of  ama  in  AMA-uSumgal-anna 
is  uncertain;  it  cannot,  therefore,  be  taken  as  an  indication  that  Dumu-zi  was  originally  a  female 
deity  (Zimmern,  Der  babylonische  Gott  Tamuz,  p.  7);  as  to  the  composition  of  the  name,  AMA 
or  DAGA(L),  DAMA(L),  etc.,  is  probably  the  proper  name  to  which  uSum'-gal'-an-na  forms  an 
apposition. 

8  See  the  passage  just  quoted. 


VOL.  IV. 


120  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

Dumu-zi  as  dumu-^umun-gis-zi-da.1  The  identification  of 
dGis-zi-da,  whom  Adapa  meets  in  the  gate  of  Ami's  palace, 
with  the  god  dnin-gis-zi-da,  however,  cannot  be  proved  and, 
moreover,  is  not  very  likely,  because  elsewhere  the  enlarging 
of  a  name  by  nin  is  noticed  only  in  feminine  names. 

The  mother  of  Dumu-zi,  according  to  the  list  of  gods 
2  R  59,  Rev. 9,  and  Zimmern,  Der  babylonische  Gott  Tammuz, 
p.  13,  is  the  goddess  dsir-du,  in  Eme-SAL  dze-ir-tu(r).2  Dumu- 
zi  is  therefore  called  the  son  of  Sirtu(r)  and  this  designation 
is  even  used  as  a  divine  name;  cf.  ddumu-ze-ir-tu-ra,  VAT  617 
Col.  26;  ddumu-ze-ir-tu-ra-ge,  Macmillan,  Rel.  Texts  32.3 

A  sister  of  Dumu-zi  is  the  goddess  dGestin-an-na,  in  Eme- 
SAL  dmu(s)-tin-an-na  or  dmu(s)-ti-an-na,  who  also  bears  the 
shorter  name  dgastin,  in  Eme-SAL  dmu(s)-ti  or  dmu(s)-tin,  while 
the  Semites  usually  called  her  dbe-lit-seri;4  Dumu-zi  is  there- 
fore designated  as  ses-ama-mus-tin-na,  CT  15,  i8i3;  IV  R  30, 
22i.5i  and  the  duplicate  SBH  3720!  4  R  27,  i12;  and  compare 
also  the  designation  of  the  goddess  as  "his  sister"  and  "the 
sister  of  the  lord."5  According  to  Istar's  descent  into  Hades,6 
Dumu-zi  is  the  only  brother  of  Be-li-li,7  but  whether  this  goddess 
can  be  identified  with  Gestin-anna,  or  does  not  rather  belong 
to  a  different  tradition,  it  is  difficult  to  decide  at  the  present. 

1  Dumu  u-mu-un-mu(5)-zi-da  CT  15,  205;   {u-mu  umun-mu(5)-zi-da  4  R  27,  ie;   Macmillan, 
Rel.  Texts  30,  dupl.,  SBH  8o6;  4  R  30,  No.  2,  Rev.3,  dupl.,  SBH  3714. 

2  dze-ir-tu(r)  |  dsir-du  |  ama  ddumu-zi-ge.     The  list  is  part  of  an  Eme-SAL  and  Eme-KU 
vocabulary;  the  section  to  which  the  list  belongs  deals  with  names  of  gods  beginning  with  umun 
and  mu  "lord"  (Eme-SAL)  =  en,  nin  and  lugal  (Eme-KU),  and  with  gasan  "lady"  (Eme-SAL)  = 
nin,  eres"  (Eme-KU);  the  next  section  (on  the  following  tablet)  began  with  mu  =  gii  =  sa-mu-u. 

3  Without  mentioning  the  names,  the  mother  and  the  father  of  Dumu-zi  are  referred  to  in 
CT  1 5,  2601-52  as  ama-u-tu-da-ni  and  ab-ba-ni. 

4  Zimmern,  Der  babylonische  Gott  Tamuz,  p.  13. 

10<Jmu(s>ti  dgestin  dbe-lit-seri 

lldmu(s>ti-an-na  d[geSt]in-an-na  dbe-lit-seri 

6  E.  g.,  CT  15,  20  20SAL  +  KU-a-ni  ama5(?)-ta  e-da-ni2i  dmu(s)-tin-an-na  SAL+  KU-u-mu- 
un-na-ge(P)  ama§(?)-ta  e-da-ni. 

6  Rev.  66a-bi  e-du  la  ta-l)ab-bil-an-[ni]. 

7  According  to  the  list  of  gods  an  (  da-nu-um  CT  24,  dbe-li-li  is  one  of  the  primeval  female 
An-deities;  i.  e.,  she  represents  the  earth,  while  the  male  god  who  is  associated  with  her,  A-la-la, 
represents  the  Heaven.     It  will  be  observed  that  this  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the  role  of  Belili 
as  an  under-world  deity  in  litar's  descent  to  Hades.     To  what  language  the  names  Alala  and 
Belili  belong,  we  do  not  know. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW   LISTS  OF   KINGS  121 

The  connection  of  Belit-seri  with  the  nether  world,  however, 
seems   to  be  proved   by  Gilgames"  dream,   in  which   he  sees 

[ J-EDIN,  the  female  scribe  of  the  earth,  /.  e.,  the  nether 

world,  kneeling  before  Eres-kigal.1 

The  list  of  kings  has  after  the  name  of  Dumu-zi  the  remark: 
"whose  city  was  HA-AV  which  no  doubt  is  intended  to  mean 
that  Dumu-zi  lived  in  this  city  during  his  childhood  and  youth. 
This  explains  why  in  Macm.  3O25. 26,  dupl.  SBH  8025.25,  the  plain 
of  A-HAkl  occurs  immediately  after  the  lines  mentioning  "the 
city  of  the  youth,"  /.  e.,  of  the  young  Dumu-zi.2  The  city  of 
HA-Akl  occurs  likewise  in  the  two  texts  published  as  Nos.  20 
and  21,  according  to  which  this  city  was  destroyed  at  the  time 
of  Lugal-banda,  the  predecessor  of  Dumu-zi.  In  the  incanta- 
tion CT  15,6  A-HA1"  is  rendered  as  su-ba-ri,3  while  Macm. 
3026  and  dupl.  SBH  8o26  render  it  as  su?-'a-a-ra4  both  of  which 
seem  to  denote  a  suwari;  in  2  R  57,  Column  4,  moreover, 
A-HAkl  is  glossed  tuba,  which  can  hardly  be  taken  as  a  variant 
pronunciation  of  suba(r)  if  the  text  of  2  R  57  is  correct. 
Langdon,  Liturgies,  page  1 15,  note  2,  suggests  a  reading  ha-bur 
for  UA-A,  which,  in  view  of  the  gloss  just  mentioned,  cannot 
be  regarded  as  likely.  However,  according  to  4  R  36  No.  i, 
Col.  i26_28,  there  were  three  cities  the  names  of  which  were 
written  HA-Aki,  and  very  likely  in  each  case  HA-A  had  a 
different  pronunciation.  The  city  of  HA-Ak:  with  which  we 
are  here  concerned  was  situated  in  the  southwestern  part  of 
Southern  Babylonia,  since  in  the  tablet  published  as  No.  49 


ldNin-ge5tin-(an-)na  2  R  27,  5290  is  evidently  the  same  deity  as  dge§tin-an-na,  the  names 
differing  simply  in  that  in  the  one  ges"tin-anna  is  preceded  by  nin  "lady"  to  which  geStin-anna 
now  forms  an  apposition;  "the  lady,  the ;  cf.  dmah  (or  dingir-mah?)  and  nin-mah." 

2  Macm.  30  23[ ]  uru-guruS-tur-ra-ge  24[ .]  a-al  ba-tu-Iim. 

26[ ]. .  edin(-na)  A-fcIAkl-ge         26[ ]  ana(?)  §i-e-ri  Su-'a-a-ra. 

Zimmern  translates  "Stadt  der  Jiinglinge,"  but  this  would  be  uru-guru5-tur-ra-ne-ge  = 
a-al  ba-tu-li,  an  expression  which,  moreover,  it  would  not  be  easy  to  explain.  For  the  plural 

see,  e.  g.,\.  17:  [ ]  umun-ne-ne-5u(?)  (read  thus  instead  of  umun-bil-bil-s'u;  «=  umun(n) 

+ene+ . . .)  =  [ 1  5a  5ar-ra-ni.    The  variant  edin-na  instead  of  edin  is  corrupt. 

3239Eridukl  A-HAkl-SCl  mu-un-na-ri- -me-en 

24055  ina  eri-dukl  6  Su-ba-ri .  .  .  .-hu-u  ana-ku 

4  Macmillan's  copy  has  KU-'a-a-ra,  which  may  very  well  be  correct. 


122  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

in  Langdon,  Tablets  from  the  Archives  of  Drehem,  it  is 
mentioned  together  with  Erek,  Eridu  and  Ur,  and  in  the 
incantation  CT  15,6  together  with  Eridu. 

A  city  noted  for  its  Dumu-zi  cult  towards  the  end  of 
the  third  millennium  B.C.  is  Dur-Gurgurri ;  Sin-idinnam  of 
Larsam  tells  us  that  he  built  the  wall  of  this  city  and  that  he 
"rejoiced  the  heart  of  Samas  and  Dumu-zi;"  note  also  the 
designation  of  Dumu-zi  as  u-mu-un-e  BAD-URUDU-NAGARki, 
"lord  of  Dur-Gurgurri,"  in  a  text  dating  from  the  time  of  the 
Dynasty  of  Babylon.1  Whether  this  can  be  taken  as  an  indi- 
cation that  the  city  played  some  part  in  the  Dumu-zi  legend, 
it  is  impossible  to  say  at  the  present;  it  is  not  very  likely 
because  in  the  Assyrian  versions  of  the  Dumu-zi  songs  the  title 
"lord  of  BAD-URUDU-NAGAR"  does  not  occur  and  there- 
fore probably  was  likewise  not  found  in  older  Babylonian 
versions. 

Dumu-zi's  connection  with  the  Istar  cities  Uruk  and 
Kullab  is  attested  by  the  inscription  of  Utu-hegal,  where  In- 
nanna,  Dumu-zi  and  Gilgames  are  mentioned  in  that  section  of 
the  inscription  which  deals  with  the  king's  sojourn  in  these 
two  cities.2 

The  legend  of  Dumu-zi,  as  quoted  above,  is  the  reflection 
of  a  yearly  occurrence  in  nature;  Dumu-zi  is  the  personifica- 
tion of  the  vegetation  which  must  die  in  the  summer  heat, 
until  with  the  new  year  it  rises  again  to  new  life.  In  the  his- 
torical system  of  the  Babylonians,  however,  this  mythological 
feature  seems  to  have  been  entirely  disregarded,  Dumu-zi 
appearing  here  as  a  king  of  Uruk  who  like  others  lived  and 
ruled  for  a  certain  time.  From  the  historical  epic,  No.  20 
(and  21),  Rev.i4ff,  we  see  that  there  was  a  tradition  concern- 
ing an  invasion  of  Babylonia  at  the  time  of  Dumu-zi  by  the 
Elamites  which  was  especially  directed  against  the  city  of 
EZEN  +  AZAGkl.  According  to  the  same  text  this  was  the 
second  time  that  the  Elamites  "came  forth  from  the  mountains." 

'CT  15,  18  (15821). 
2  Col.  2. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  123 

"GIS-BIL-ga-mes,1  dGI$-BlL-ge-mes,2  dGlS(-BlL-ga-mes),8 
dGI$-GE-mas',4  gi-il-ga-me-es',5  yiXya/Aos,6  kal-ga-imin7,  is  the 
well-known  hero  of  the  epic  usually  designated  as  Gilgames' 
epic.  According  to  this  epic  GilgameS  was  shepherd,  i.  e., 
in  a  less  poetical  term,  king  of  Uruk,8  which  accords  with 
the  fact  that  the  king  list  assigns  him  to  the  first  dynasty 
of  Uruk  or  Eanna.  Compare  also  the  passage  in  the  old- 
Babylonian  version  in  which  Enkidu  says  to  Gilgames',  sar-ru- 
tam  sa  ni-si  i-si-im-kum  den-lil,  "the  kingdom  of  the  people 
Enlil  has  destined  for  thee."9  According  to  Gilg.  Ep.  I, 
Col.  1 9,  our  hero  built  the  wall  of  Uruk,10  a  tradition  like- 
wise found  in  the  inscription  of  AN-am,  where  the  wall  of  Uruk 
is  called  an  ancient  work  of  Gilgames'. n  According  to  Gilg. 
Ep.  1,  Col.  i10ff,  Gilgames'  also  built  the  temple  Eanna  at 
Uruk,  or  at  least,  the  Sutummu.12  A  similar  tradition  of  build- 
ing operations  on  the  part  of  Gilgames'  existed  at  Nippur,  for 
the  tablet  published  as  No.  8  states  that  when  the  Tummal 
of  Nin-lil  had  been  destroyed,  Gilgames  built  or  rebuilt  a  cer- 
tain part  of  the  temple  of  Enlil.13 

From  an  incantation  in  which  Gilgames  is  invoked14  we 
see  that  after  his  earthly  days  the  king  became  the  judge  of 
the  Anunnaki.  Line  5  of  this  text  contains  the  words  ta-az- 
za-az  ina  irsi-tim  ta-gam-mar  di-[...  ];  but  it  cannot  be 
concluded,  as  it  has  been,  from  this  passage  that  he  was  a 

1  No.  2  Col.  2M;  stone  tablet  of  AN-am  7;  BE  VI  2  No.  26  Col.  36;  5  R  J3,  6  No.  i  =  CT 
1 8,  30  Col.  3s,  etc.  The  signs  GI$-BIL-ga  are  to  be  read  '"gibil-ga,  which  first  developed  to 
genrilga  and  then  to  gilga.  See  p.  127. 

I  For  this  writing  of  the  name  see  Allotte  de  la  Fuye  and  Thureau-Dangin  in  R  A  6.  p.  124. 
» Old-  Babylonian  version  of  the  GilgameS  epic,  VAT4IO5  (MVG  VII  pp.  4,5),and  BS  15282. 
4  Assyrian  version  of  the  GilgameS  epic;   MaqlQ,  Tablet  2  (K  43,  etc.)  Obv.n,  etc. 

•  Pinches,  BOR  IV  p.  264  (82-5-22,915,  gloss  to  dGI§-GE-maS). 
'  Aelianus,  De  natura  animalium  12,  21. 
7  5  R  32,  6  No.  i  =  CT  18,  30  Col.  46. 

•Tablet  I,  Col.  224,  Su-u  re'0-ma  Sa  urukw[ ]. 

•BS  15282  Col.  632'.33'. 

10  [ ] . . .  dflru  5a  urukkl  su-bu-ri. 

II  Cf.,  'bad  unukl-ga  «nig-dim-cUm-ma-labar-ra  7<1GlS-BIL-ga-mes-ge. 

11  [. . . .  6-a]n-na  qud-clu-si  Su-tum-mi  el-lim 

[ j-na-Su  Sa  ki-ma  qi-e  NI[ ].  etc. 

11  »[A-r]a-2-kam  Itum-ma-al"  ba-Sub  »-«(dGI]$-BlL-ga-nies-e  GUG-bur-ra 'en-lil-la  in-dQ 
14  Haupt,  Nimrodepos,  p.  93. 


124  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

judge  of  the  nether  world;  on  the  contrary,  the  statement  that 
he  overlooks  the  regions  of  the  world  (1.  2)  and  that  Samas, 
the  god  of  judgment,  entrusted  "incantation"  and  "decision" 
to  him  seems  rather  to  indicate  that  he  had  to  do  with  Heaven 
and  the  upper  earth. 

Concerning  the  childhood  of  Gilgames,  Aelianus  in  De 
natura  animalium  12,  21  relates  a  story  according  to  which 
TiXya/xo?  was  born  in  secret  by  his  mother  and  thrown  over 
the  precipice  on  which  the  palace  of  his  grandfather  stood,  but 
was  miraculously  saved  by  an  eagle  which  caught  him  in  his  fall 
and  carried  him  to  an  orchard;  there  he  was  found  by  the  keeper, 
in  whose  care  he  grew  up  to  manhood  and  finally  became  king. 
The  grandfather  of  Gilgames  on  the  mother's  side,  according  to 
this  story,  was  king  Seu^xopos  or  Sa^opo?,  but  it  is  not  possible 
to  identify  this  king  with  any  of  Gilgames'  predecessors,  and  on 
the  whole,  the  story  told  by  Aelian  does  not  seem  to  fit  very 
well  with  what  we  know  of  Gilgames;  possibly  the  story  may 
therefore  have  originally  been  told  of  some  other  Babylonian  king. 

According  to  the  inscription  of  Utu-hegal,  Gilgames  was 
,the  son  of  Nin-sun.1  In  Reissner,  SBH  No.III9ilo,  this  goddess 
is  called  the  mother  of  the  lord,2  the  latter  expression  referring 
perhaps  to  Gilgames.  Note  also  that  in  the  Nippur  docu- 
ment from  the  time  of  Samsu-iluna,  BE  VI  2  No.  26,  Col.  36, 
a  field  sur-dGI$-BIL-ga-mes  and  a  pasisu  office  at  the  temple 
of  Nin-sun  figure  as  portions  of  an  inheritance,  from  which 
fact  we  may  conclude  that  Gilgames,  as  the  son  of  Nin-sun, 
was  worshipped  at  Nippur  in  the  temple  of  this  goddess.  The 
mother  of  our  hero,  furthermore,  is  frequently  mentioned  in 
the  earlier  part  of  the  Gilgames  epic  where  she  is  given  the 
epithet  mu-da-at  ka-la-ma,  "who  knows  all,"  or  mu-da-at 
ka-la-ma  i-di,  "who  knows  all  knowledge,"3  and  in  correspond- 
ence with  this  epithet  is  able  to  interpret  the  dreams  of  her  son. 

1  Col.  3,  ldGlS-B!L-ga-mes  2du[mu]  dnin-sun-na-ge  3ma§kim-su  ma-an-si. 
1  Reissner,  SBH,  No.  Ill,  Col.  i,  9ama-umun-e  dgas"an-sun-na   =  urn-mi  be-lim  dnin-sun; 
48  Obv.,  21ama-umun-na  gaian-sun-na. 

1  The  former  in  the  old-Babylonian  version,  the  latter  in  the  Assyrian  version. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  125 

In  the  Assyrian  version  of  the  epic  the  passages  referring  to 
the  mother  of  Gilgames'  are  all  more  or  less  broken.1  By  com- 
bining two  of  them  it  has  been  concluded  that  her  name  was 
"alri-mat-dnin-lil,2  and  3s  in  one  of  the  passages  the  name  of 
Ninsun  quite  clearly  occurs,  this  conjectural  Rimat-Ninlil  was 
declared  to  be  priestess  of  Ninsun.3  At  the  end  of  the  second 
tablet  of  the  old-Babylonian  version,  however,  we  find  the 
following  words  addressed  to  Gilgames  by  Enkidu:  ki-ma 
is-te-en-ma  um-ma-ka  u-li-id-ka  ri-im-tum  sa  zu-bu-ri  dnin- 
sun-na,  "as  one  unique  (among  men)4  thy  mother  has  born 
thee,  the  wild  cow5  of  the  enclosures,  Ninsunna,"  from  which 
it  follows  that  salri-mat  is  not  part  of  a  proper  name,  but  an 
appellation  of  Ninsun,  this  goddess  being  thus  the  mother 
of  Gilgames  also  in  the  Assyrian  version  of  the  epic6  as  well 
as  in  the  old-Babylonian. 

The  list  of  kings  No.  2  apparently  gave  the  name  of  the 
father  of  Gilgames;  but  unfortunately  only  the  first  sign,  a-, 
is  preserved.  According  to  the  following  line,  he  was  high 
priest  of  Kullab  and  therefore  apparently  a  mortal,  as,  more- 

1  The  passages  of  any  use  for  the  restoration  of  the  name  are  the  following: 

Tablet  I,  Column  629.30  (Jeremias,  Izdubar-Nimrod,  pi.  Ill  f.). 

29[ ]-LIL  mu-da-at  ka-la-ma  i-di  izaqa(r)-ra  ana  mari-s'a 

*°[ ]-LIL  mu-da-at  ka-la-ma  i-di  izaqa(r)-ra  ana  dGI§-GE-ma5 

Tablet  III,  Column  1322-24  (Haupt,  NE,  p.  20). 

22[ib-ri  i]  ni-il-li-ka  a-na  6-gal-mab 

23[ dni]n-sun  Sar-ra-ti  rabt-ti 

24[ m]u-da-at  ka-la-ma  i-di,  etc. 

Tablet  IV,  Column  317.49  (Haupt,  NE,  p.  82). 

47[u]m-mu  dGIS-GE-ma5  mu-da-at  ka-la-ma 

«izaqa(r)-ra  [ ]  a?[ ] 

«  ^ri-mat  dnin-[ ] 

2  Jensen,  in  Das  Gilgame^epos  in  der  Weltliteratur,  p.  7,  suggested  ReSat-Belit;   Ungnad,  in 
Ungnad  and  Gressmann,  Das  Gilgamesch-Epos,  and  Thureau-Dangin,  RA  g,  pp.  118,  119,  take 
8alri-s'at-dnin-lil  as  certain. 

•Thureau-Dangin,  RA  IX,  p.  119. 

4  Bten  (=  one)  has  perhaps  simply  the  meaning  of  "man,"  "hero." 

5  Rimtum  "wild  cow"  is  a  poetical  expression  for  "the  strong  one." 

6  Read,  therefore,  8alri-mat  dnin-sun  mu-da-at  ka-la-ma  i-di,  if    the  signs    AN-N1N  in 
Haupt's  copy  of  IV,  Column  3«  are  correct.     (Haupt  states  that  the  text  is  very  difficult  to 
read.)     The  omission  of  the  ending  finds  a  parallel  in  8ftl$am-bat  for  which  the  old-Babylonian 
version  has  Sa-am-ka-tum. 


126  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

over,  is  attested  by  the  fact  that  his  name  does  not  have  the 
determinative  for  god.  This  circumstance  is  of  importance, 
because  according  to  the  epic  his  son  Gilgames  was  two-thirds 
god  and  one-third  man,  which  necessarily  presupposes  that 
the  mother  must  have  been  a  deity,  thus  furnishing  a  further 
indication  that  Gilgames  was  the  son  of  the  goddess  Ninsun. 

In  the  vocabulary  5  R  30,  6  No.  i  =  CT  18,  30,  part  of 
which  is  evidently  taken  from  a  commentary  to  a  Sumerian 
version  of  the  Gilgames  epic,1  the  Sumerian  column  gives  the 
name  of  the  hero  as  kal-ga-imin  "Seven-strong"2  and  that 

of  Gilgames'   friend  as  A-DU-imin  "Seven- ,"2  while 

Ut-napistim,  as  will  be  remembered,  appears  as  Zi-SUD-da. 
How  this  difference  in  the  names  has  to  be  explained,  we  do 
not  yet  know;  kal-ga-imin  "Seven-strong"  may  originally 
have  been  a  descriptive  epithet,3  just  as  is  Watram-hasis, 
"Very-wise,"  for  the  hero  of  the  deluge  story.  For  the  names 
Gilgames',  Enkidu  and  Ziu^/Wdu  the  Babylonians  themselves 
had  evidently  no  definite  etymology  as  we  see  from  the  widely 
variant  modes  of  writing  and  pronouncing  them,4  a  fact  which 
perhaps  indicates  that  these  names  were  not  of  Sumerian  origin, 
though  later  adapted  to  the  Sumerian  language.  The  first 
part  of  the  name  G I S- B 1  L-ga-mes'  was  evidently  regarded  as 
identical  with  the  same  element  in  pa-GlS-BlL-ga  "grand- 

1  Cf.  Col.  3  lsME-gal-zu  =  Su-ut-tam  pa-5a-ru  and  Gilg.  Ep.  I  Col.  524  Su-na-ta  ipalar*1"; 
"kili-an  =  kakkab  $ame-e  and  Gilg.  Ep.  I  Col.  5n  kakkab  Same-e. 

1  Note,  however,  that  in  Col.  2  I.M1N  is  rendered  u-ru-uk. 

1  The  vocabulary  mentioned  above  renders  kal-ga-imin  also  muq-tab-lu  "fighter"  and  a-lik 
pa-na  "man  of  old,"  i.  e.,  one  of  the  old  strong  race  of  man. 

4  Cf.  den-ki-du,  Assyrian  version  of  the  Gilgames'  epic;  den-ki-dO,  old-Babylonian  version 
of  the  Gilgames'  epic;  en-gi-du,  CT  18,  3010. 

The  readings  den-ki-du  and  den-ki-dO,  instead  of  Ea-bani  and  Ea-tabu,  were  given,  by  reason 
of  the  principles  established  by  me  for  the  reading  of  proper  names,  in  my  habilitationsschrift 
"  Die  sumerischen  Personennamen  zur  Zeit  der  Dynastic  von  Larsam  und  der  ersten  Dynastie 
von  Babylon"  (laid  before  the  Philosophical  Faculty  of  the  University  of  Halle  in  May,  1909, 
published  in  summer,  1910)  in  note  i  on  page  12;  compare  also  note  2  on  page  8 1  in  Clay,  Amurru, 
1909.  Ungnad,  in  Gressmann,  Altorientalische  Texte  und  Bilcler,  1909,  read  Ea-bani,  but 
remarked  in  note  2  on  page  41  that  the  name  is  probably  Sumerian  and  to  be  read  Enkidu  or 
the  like.  The  identity  of  en-gi-du,  CT  18,  3010,  with  den-ki-du  and  den-ki-du  was  first  recognized 
by  Jensen,  who  by  letter  communicated  his  discovery  to  Ungnad;  see  Ungnad  in  OLZ,  1910, 
Col.  306. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  127 

father,"  "forefather,"1  for  which  the  date  formula  Ammi- 
ditana  34  has  only  pa-BIL-ga  and  LIH  98,  99,54,  pa-BIL-ga  = 
9761  a-bi  a-bi(-ia);  cf.  also  GlS-BIL  =  [a-bu]  "father"  2  R  ^2^? 
The  second  element  mes  =  "hero"  was  evidently  taken  as  an 
allusion  to  the  hero  character  of  Gilgames.  The  name  GIS- 
GIN-mas  of  the  Assyrian  version  is  a  different  pronunciation 
and  a  different  phonetic  writing  of  the  same  name,  comparing 
with  dGI$-BIL-ga-mes  as  does  Zi-gid-da  with  Zi-0-£*W-du; 
according  to  82-5-22,  9152  the  Assyrians  pronounced  it  gi-il- 
ga-me-es,  which  evidently  goes  back  to  an  original  gisgibil- 
ga-mes.  Whether  dGlS  in  the  old-Babylonian  version  of  the 
epic  is  simply  an  abbreviation  of  dGlS-B!L-ga-mes  or  perhaps 
represents  a  different  name  of  the  hero,  cannot  yet  be  definitely 
decided,  since  the  first  tablet  which  must  have  given  the  full 
name  when  first  mentioning  the  hero  has  not  yet  been  recovered; 
but  despite  the  fact  that  abbreviations  are  not  elsewhere  met 
with  in  old-Babylonian  names,  it  is  here  very  likely  that  dGlS 
is  indeed  an  abbreviation. 

[ ]-lugal,  son  of  Gilgames,  is  supplied  from  text  No.  8 

and  9,  according  to  which  he  built  the  tum-ma-al  of  Ninlil  at 
Nippur.  Whether,  however,  he  was  the  immediate  successor 
of  his  father,  we  do  not  know. 

Mes-an-ni-pa-da,  "Hero,  called  by  Enlil."  With  the 
first  kingdom  of  Ur  we  reach  comparatively  historical  times 
as  is  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  years  of  reign  attributed  to 
the  kings  of  this  dynasty  are  entirely  within  the  limits  of 
possibility,  although  the  eighty-year  period  of  the  first  king 
is  rather  high,  and  the  composition  of  the  names  of  both  the 
first  and  second  king,  Mes-anni-pada  and  Mes-kiag-nunna, 
with  mes  "hero"  seems  to  be  suggestive  of  legendary  characters. 

1  Eannatum,  stone  A  84. 

2  The  stem  of  the  word  is  perhaps  GlS-BlL(g),  i.  e.,  glsgibil(g)  or  *18gil(g),  and  GI$-BIL-ga 
may  therefore  be  the  locative  =  GIS-BlLg-a;  however,  it  seems  more  likely  that  there  existed 
an  absolute  form  GIS-BlL-ga;  likewise  it  must  remain  uncertain  for  the  present  whether  "father" 
is  the  original  meaning  of  the  word.     Should  the  element  kal-ga  in  kal-ga-imin  perhaps  be  a 
variant  of  gilga  in  GIS-BlL-ga-mes?     But  how  could   then   imin  be  identified  with  mes?     Do 
perhaps  both  names  go  back  to   a   foreign  kilgaimines   or   the   like,  in  which  es  was  a  case 
(perhaps  nominative)  ending? 

'See  Pinches  in  BOR  IV,  p.  264. 


128  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

Mes-ki-ag-nun-na,  "the  hero,  the  beloved  of  the  Highest." 

E-lu-[ ].  Compare  perhaps  e-lu-lu,  the  name  of  one 

of  the  kings  of  Agade. 

Ba-lu-[ . . .  ],  perhaps  ba-lu-lu?  Are  perhaps  e-lulu  and 
ba-lu-lu  active  and  passive  forms  of  a  Sumerian  verb  lu-lu? 

The  dynasty  of  Awan  again  leads  us  into  legendary  times, 
for  the  list  ascribes  356  years  to  the  three  rulers  of  this  dynasty. 
Awan  was  an  Elamitic  city,  situated,  it  seems,  at  no  great 
distance  from  Susa,  since  in  an  inscription  of  Rimus  a  certain 
locality  is  described  as  being  situated  between  (?)  Awan  and 
Susum.1  In  No.  34,  Col.  i241,,  it  appears  also  among  the  cities 
which  paid  tribute  to  Sarrukin  during  his  campaign  against 
Elam  and  Barahsi.  The  passages  just  noted  show  that  Awan 
was  an  important  city  of  Elam  in  early  historical  times;  the 
tradition  that  kings  of  this  city  ruled  over  Babylonia  in  an 
even  earlier  period  need  therefore  meet  with  no  suspicion 
whatever.  We  may  suppose  that  the  Babylonians  possessed 
legends  and  epics  relating  to  the  conquest  of  Babylonia  by  these 
kings  of  Awan  as  well  as  to  its  final  liberation  from  the  yoke 
of  the  foreigners. 

AN-na-ni  is  mentioned  in  No.  69  as  builder  (or  rebuilder) 
of  the  GlS-SAR-mah  of  the  house  of  Enlil  at  Nippur.  He  is 
assigned  to  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  on  account  of  the  fact 
that  the  name  of  his  son  and  successor  is  compounded  with 
Nanna,  the  god  of  Ur. 

Lu-dnanna  is  supplied  from  No.  6i0,  according  to  which 
passage  he  restored  the  Tummal  of  Ninlil  at  Nippur. 

Lugal-da-LU,  " ing  with  the  lord."  The  name  of  this 

king  is  found  in  the  inscription  on  a  statue  excavated  by 
Banks  at  Adab;  the  inscription  reads  !e-sar  2lugal-da-LU 
3lugal  adabki  "E-sar,  Lugal-da-LU,  king  of  Adab."2 

1  HGT  34  Col.  2319.23  and  AO  547613.16:  in  ba-rf-ti  a-wa-anki  u  su-si-imkl. 

a  Banks,  AJSL  21,  p.  57-59  and  Bismya,  p.  196.  While  Banks  read  lugal  da-udu,  "King 
David,"  Thureau-Dangin,  in  SAKI,  p.  152,  took  E-sar  in  the  first  line  as  the  name  of  the  king 
and  read  in  the  second  line  Sarru  da-lu  "mighty  king."  This  latter  interpretation,  however, 
is  impossible,  since  E-sar,  as  Banks  rightly  contends,  is  the  name  of  a  temple  at  Adab,  mentioned 
also  in  the  inscription  of  King  Me-IGI. . .[ ]  of  Adab,  Bismya,  p.  264,  as  well  as  in  the  in- 
scription dedicated  to  Mesilim,  1.  c.,  p.  201;  as  6-sar-ra  it  likewise  occurs  in  No.  157  Col.  17. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  129 

Me-IGI. ..[....].  The  name  of  this  king  is  found  in  an 
inscription  on  a  vase  from  Bismya,1  reading  'e'-sar1  2me-IGl- 
...[.'...]  3lugal  4adabki  "E-sar,  Me-IGI.... ,  king  of  Adah." 

E-an-na-du(m),  abbreviated  from  e-an-na-dinnanna-ib-gal- 
ka-ka-du(m);2  lum-ma.3  This  isakku  of  LagaS  must  probably 
be  reckoned  as  a  king  of  Kis  on  account  of  the  passage 
Eannadu,  door  socket  A  520-25:  e-an-na-du . . . .  ra  26dinnanna-ge 

61 2nam-isa(g)-SlR-LA-BURki-ta   4nam-lugal-ki§(i)ki   5mu- 

na-ta-si,  "to  Eannadu  Innanna  gave  the  kingdom  of  Ki<>  from 
(i.  e.,  growing  out  from)  the  Isakkuship  of  Lagas."  See 
Chapter  V. 

Ku-dba-u,  the  queen  who  founded  the  fourth  (?)  kingdom 
of  Kis,  began  her  career  as  keeper  of  a  wine  house,  sal-lu-gas- 
tin-na,4  according  to  the  list  of  kings  published  by  Scheil.5 
The  same  list  adds  the  statement  that  she  "firmly  establishes 
the  foundations  of  Kis,"  from  which  it  has  been  concluded  that 
she  was  the  first  founder  of  the  city  ;6  but,  as  our  new  lists  show, 
Kis  had  been  the  capital  of  three  kingdoms  before  Ku-Bau. 
The  meaning  of  the  phrase  is,  of  course,  merely  that  the  queen 
laid  the  foundations  for  the  political  and  economical  strength 
and  importance  of  the  city.  Ku-Bau  is  also  mentioned  in  the 
list  5  R  44,  Col.  1 14  among  "the  rulers  after  the  deluge;"  her 
name  is  there  translated:  dba-u-el-lit  "Bau  is  bright,"  which 
probably  is  not  correct,  the  name  evidently  meaning  "Silver 

Note  that  in  all  the  inscriptions  from  Bismya  the  temple  is  mentioned  without  a  postposition 
which  would  make  clear  its  grammatical  relation  to  the  following  names,  a' fact  which  shows 
that  they  belong  to  a  very  archaic  age.  Thureau-Dangin's  interpretation,  moreover,  assumes 
that  the  inscription  is  written  in  Semitic,  but  there  is  not  the  slightest  indication  that  the  popula- 
tion of  Adab,  in  this  early  period,  was  in  the  least  Semitic. 

1  Banks,  Bismya,  p.  264.    ' 

2  Stele  of  Vultures,  Col.  526-23;  see  Poebel,  "Zur  Geierstele,"  OLZ  191 1,  Cols.  198-200. 

3  Foundation  stone  A  Col.  $u;  see  Chapter  V. 

4  In  better  Sumerian  we  ought  to  expect  only  sal-gaS-tin-na,  "woman  of  the  wine,"  "wine- 
woman,"  the  feminine  to  lu-ga§-tin-na,  "man  of  the  wine."     Sal-Iu-ga5-tin-na  is  formed  from  the 
latter  by  prefixing  sal;  the  correct  form  sal-ga5-tin-na  is  found  in  Stele  of  the  code  of  Hammu- 
rabi, Rev.,  Col.  u8;   the  tablet,  No.  93,  Col.  4,  last  line,  has  sal-lu-tin-na  which  is  evidently  a 
mistake. 

6»Ki2(i)kl-a    ku-dba-u   sal-lu-gaS-tin-na  suhu5-kiSikl  mu-un-gi-na  10lugal-am    14  (text    100) 
mu  in-a. 

«  See  Eduard  Meyer  in  SbKPAW  1912,  p.  1088,  Note  2. 


130  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

of  Bau."1  The  queen  is  likewise  mentioned  in  the  omen  text 
K  1662,3,  according  to  which  "she  subdued  the  land."2  The  one 
hundred  years  of  reign,  ascribed  to  her  by  Scheil's  list,  must 
be  corrected  into  14;  see  Peiser,  OLZ  1912,  Cols.  108  and  154, 
and  Poebel,  ibid.  289-291. 

Sar-ru-GI(=  kin),3  sar-um-GI(  =  kin),4  sar-ru-ki-in,5  Sarru- 
GI-NA  (^kin)/5  sarru-GIN  (  =  kin),7  sarru-GI-0?-NA  (  =  kin),8 
sa-ru-ki-in.9  According  to  Scheil's  list  the  father  of  Sarrukin 
was  a  gardener  and  a  QA-su-du  of  the  god  Zamama,  unless  the 
latter  apposition  refers  to  Sarrukin  himself,  which  is  possible.10 
In  either  case,  however,  it  is  apparent  that  the  well-known 
legend  of  Sarrukin's  clandestine  birth,  exposure  in  the  Euphrates 
and  adoption  by  the  water-pourer  Akki  cannot  very  well  be 
harmonized  with  the  statement  of  the  list;  we  may  therefore 
suppose  that  the  legend  is  founded  on  a  different  tradition  of 
a  more  popular  character.  As  to  this  popular  character  com- 
pare the  allusion  to  Agade  in  the  name  of  Akki  (see  p.  231); 
should  perhaps  the  words  ab-ba-ni  nu-GlS-SAR  of  the  list  of 
kings  have  first  suggested  the  abi  ul  idi  or  aba  ul  iSi  of  the 
legend?11 

On  the  new  historical  material  concerning  Sarru-kin  and 

I  See  Poebel,  Die  sumerischen  Personennamen,  pp.  32  and  43. 
1CT28,  6,  ES-BAR,  "^ku^ba-u  Sa  mata  i-be-lum,  etc. 

*  Semitic  inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin,  and  in  the  name  iar-ru-GI(  =  kin)-i-li,  "$arru-kin  is  my 
god,"  ManiStusu,  Obelisk,  A  Col.  12  case  8. 

4  Sumerian  inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin. 

*  Scheil's  list  of  kings  (time  of  the  first  dynasty). 
8  Omens  of  Sarru-kin;   legend  of  Sarru-kin. 

7  Chronicle  of  Sarru-kin,  etc.;  legend  of  Sarru-kin. 

8  5  R  44,  Col.  1 13;  the  king  mentioned  in  this  list  is  evidently  the  king  of  Agade. 
*Clay,  Amurru,  p.  194. 

10Obv.,  23a-ga-d6w-a  Sar-ru-ki-in   ab!-ba-ni   NU-GlS-SAR  24QA-3u-du  "za-ma-ma  »Iugal? 
a-ga-de[kl  mu-u]n-du-a. 

II  In  the  omen  CT  20,  2(Rm  2,  1 12)  Rev.  9  and  3(K  3671)1,  t  Frank  (ZA  1913,  p.  99)  sees  an 
allusion  to  Sarru-kin's  death.     However,  his  translation:  "Sarrukenu,  den  seine  Truppen  in  eine 
Grube  (Zisterne?)  einschlossen  und  (die  so)  ihren  Herren  gemeinsam  iiberwaltigten,"  is  neither 
satisfactory  from  a  logical  point  of  view,  nor  is  it  grammatically  unobjectionable  ("whom  they 
confined"  would  be  §a  Isirusu,  not  sa  isiru;   beliSunu  cannot  be  accusative  of  the  singular  = 
"their  lord,"  which  is  belsunu;   ana  al)ames  does  not  mean  "gemeinsam"  =  itti  ahames,  but 
"to  or  upon  each  other").     The  passage  probably  means:    "Omen  of  Sarrukin  whose  army, 
while  a  rainstorm  was  raging(P),  hurled(?)  their  weapons  upon  each  other." 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  131 

the  other  kings  of  Agade,  see  Chapter  VI.  Concerning  the 
sequence  of  the  successors  of  Sarrukin,  see  OLZ  1912,  CoK. 
481-485. 

(I)ri-mu-us,1  (i)ri-mus'.2  See  Chapter  VI.  According  to 
the  omen  K  \^&  (I)rimuS  was  slain  by  his  courtiers  with  their 
seals,4  which  it  will  be  remembered  were  cylinders  of  stone. 
Probably  they  used  these  cylinders  for  want  of  better  weapons. 

Contemporaries  of  Rimus  were  a-ba-al-ga-mas,  king  of 
Barahsi5,  and  KA-AZAG,  king  of  Ur6. 

Ma-an-is-tu-su7.  The  obelisk  inscription  mentions  a  son 
of  Manistusu  by  the  name  of  me-sa-lim,8  as  well  as  a  brother 
of  his  named  (n)i-ba-ri-im9;  a-li-a-hu,  the  son  of  the  latter, 
was  therefore  the  nephew  of  Manistusu.  This  Ali-ahu,  by  the 
way,  is  one  of  the  49  DUMU-DUMU  a-ga-deki,  "citizens  of 
Agade,"10  which  city,  therefore,  was  evidently  the  residence,  or 
one  of  the  residences,  of  Manistusu.  Another  of  these  mar£ 
Agade  is  Sarru-kin-ili,  son  of  Balga,11  whose  name  proves  that 
Sarrukin's  reign  was  prior  to  that  of  Manistusu,  as  Sarru- 
kin-ili  must,  of  course,  have  been  named  during  the  time  when 
Sarrukin  was  king. 

dNa-ra-am-dsin,12  na-ra-am-dsin,13  na-ram-'sin,14  son  of  Sarru- 
kin according  to  the  chronicle  and  the  omens,  as  well  as  to  the 

1  Inscriptions  of  (I)rimus. 

2  K  1364  (Boissier,  Choix  de  textes  relatifs  a  la  divination  assyro-babylonienne,  I,  p.  441) 
and  Sm  823  (ibid.  p.  805). 

3  See  preceding  note.     The  historical  reference  in  Sm  823  is  perhaps  identical  with  that  of 
Ki364. 

<  ES-BAR  (i)ri-mus  Sard  sa  marepl  ekalli-Su  ina  abankunukki-Ju-nu  GAZ'Mu. 

5  See  inscriptions  34  u  and  x  and  RA  1911,  p.  136. 

6  See  inscriptions  34  n-p. 

7  Inscriptions  of  ManiStusu. 

•Obelisk,  B  Col.  6i3.u;   me-sa-lim  |  DUMU-LIGAL. 

"Obelisk,  A  Col.  ic^-iii;  I  a-li-a-bu  |  DUMU  (n)i-ba-ri-im  |  §E§-LUGAL.  Is  (n)ibarim 
perhaps  the  genitive  of  (n)ibarum?  Compare  perhaps  the  divine  name  in  warad-  i-ba-ri.  warad- 
i-ba-ri,  awllsabu  ka-aS-su-u  CT  6,  23,6;  8,  n8. 

10  Obelisk,  A  Col.  i6i6>16. 

11  Obelisk.  A  Col.  i28V. 

11  Inscriptions  of  Naram-Sin. 

"Chronicle;  omens,  Babylonian  version(?);  inscriptions  of  Naram-Sin  in  No.  36. 

"Omens,  Assyrian  version;  inscriptions  of  Nabu-na'id. 


132  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

inscriptions  of  Nabu-na'id.1  A  son  of  his,  na-bi-x-mas,  was 
isakku  of  tu-tu^  according  to  the  inscription  of  li-bu-us-i-a-um, 
priestess  of  Sin,  daughter  of  Nabi-x-mas  and  therefore  grand- 
daughter of  Naram-Sin.2  Another  son  of  Naram-Sin,  by  the 
name  of  li-bi-it-i-li,  was  isakku  of  the  city  of  Marad,  where  he 
built  the  temple  of  Lugal-Maradda.3  Inasmuch  as  in  the  list  of 
kings,  Text  No.  3,  Sargali-sarri,  Naram-Sin's  successor,  is  evi- 
dently designated  as  [dumu]-dumu-na[-ra-am-dsin-ge],  i.  e.,  as 
grandson  of  Naram-Sin,  Sargali-sarri's  father,  DA-ti-den-lil,4 
probably  was  a  son  of  Naram-Sin,  who,  however,  did  not  rule. 
A  tablet  belonging  to  the  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Agade5  then 
mentions  Sar-gali-sarri  and  Bl-in-ga-li-sar-ri  as  belonging  to  the 
royal  house,  and  since  on  the  seal  of  the  scribe  Izinum,6  Bl-in-gali- 
-sarri  is  designated  as  the  son  of  the  king,  he  is  probably  a  son  of 
Naram-Sin,  unless  DUMU-LUGAL  is  used  in  the  sense  of 
prince,  in  which  case  he  may  perhaps  be  a  second  son  of  DAti- 
Enlil;  whose  brother  the  u-bil-is'-tar  is,  who  on  the  seal  of  the 
scribe  Kal-ki7  is  designated  as  ses-lugal  "brother  of  the  king," 
is  entirely  uncertain.  A  contemporary  of  Naram-Sin  as  well 
as  of  Sar-gali-sarri  is  Lugal-usumgal,  issakku  of  Lagas.8 

dSar-ga-li-sar-ri,9  sar-ga-li-sar-ri,10  sar-ka-li-e-sarri,11  "a  king 
of  all  kings  ,"12  is  mentioned,  outside  of  his  own  inscrip- 
tions and  date  formulas,  in  the  omen  text,  CT  20,  2  Obv.18-20. 

The  two  broken  lines  after  the  passage  referring  to  Sar-gali- 
sarri  in  list  No.  3  undoubtedly  contain  a  summary  of  the  years 

I  Great  cylinder  inscription  from  Abu-Habba,  Col.  2a,  »:    te-me-en-na  'na-ram^sin  mar 
Isarru-GI-NA  la.  3200  MU-AN-NA-ME-ES  ma-na-ma  Sarru  a-lik  mal)-ri-ia  la  i-mu-ru. 

-  Perforated  slab  from  Telloh,  CR  1899,  p.  348. 

3  See  inscription  of  Libit-ili,  RA  XI,  p.  88  (Thureau-Dangin)  and  OLZ  1914  Col.  1 10  (Clay) 

4  Provided  that  DA-ti-den-lil  really  is  a  personal  name. 

5  The  beginning  of  the  tablet  has  been  published  by  Thureau-Dangin  in  RA  1912,  p.  82. 

6  MSnant,  Glyptique,  pi.  I  No.  i. 

7  Brit.  Mus.  89137,  M6nant,  Glyptique,  pi.  Ill  No.  i. 

8  Cf.  the  two  seals  of  Lugal-usumgal,  RA  4,  p.  n  and  RA  4,  pp.  8,  9. 

9  Inscriptions  and  date  formulas  of  §ar-gali-sarri. 

10  List  of  kings,  No.  3;   Scheil's  list. 

II  CT  20,  2  Obv.is  (Omen).     On  the  reading  Sar-ri  see  Dhorme,  OLZ  1907,  Col.  230;  Poebel, 
ZA  1908,  p.  228;  on  ga-H  see  Boissier,  Babyloniaca  4,  p.  83;  Poebel,  OLZ  1912,  Cols.  481-485. 

12Hrozny,  WZKM  1912,  p.  145,  translates  "Konig  des  Alls  ist  mein  Konig." 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS  OF    KINGS  133 

of  reign  of  those  kings  of  Agade  who  belonged  to  the  family 
of  Sarrukin,  the  founder  of  the  kingdom,  the  name  of  Sarru-kin 
being  almost  completely  preserved  in  the  second  line.  Scheil's 
list  and  list  No.  2  of  this  volume  give  197  years  to  the  whole 
dynasty;  as  the  last  six  kings  rule  thirty-nine  years,  the  first 
six  kings,  representing  the  family  of  Sarrukin,  must  therefore 
have  ruled  158  years.  In  the  summary  just  mentioned  only 
the  number  thirty-seven  is  preserved,  but  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  we  have  to  supply  two  vertical  wedges,  represent- 
ing the  number  120,  before  thirty-seven,  the  whole  number 
then  being  157;  this,  despite  the  difference  of  one  year,  which 
cannot  as  yet  be  explained,  may  be  taken  as  a  corroboration 
of  the  number  in  Scheil's  list. 

I-gi-gi,1  i-gi-gi;2  i-mi;  na-ni,1  na-nu-um;2  e-lu-lu,1  i-lu-lu.2 
After  the  summary  of  the  regnal  years  of  Sarrukin's  family 
we  find  in  No.  3  the  Semitic  words  mannum  sarrum  mannum 
la  sarrum  to  which  in  Scheil's  list  the  Sumerian  words  a-ba-am 
lugal  [a-ba-am  nu?-lugal?]  correspond.  These  words  evidently 
mean  that  with  the  overthrow  of  Sarru-kin's  family  a  time  of 
political  anarchy  began  in  which  no  one  knew  who  was  king;3 
in  fact,  the  following  lines  inform  us  that  during  the  next  three 
years  four  kings  were  pretenders  to  the  throne  of  Agade  at  the 
same  time.  All  four,  however,  were  removed,  it  seems,  by  the 
following  king  Dudu. 

Du-du  succeeded  in  again  consolidating  the  royal  power, 
as  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  his  reign  lasted  twenty-one  years  and 
that  he  was  followed  by  his  son.  The  small  fragment  of  a  vase 
inscription  published  as  No.  39  proves  that  this  king  exercised 
authority  at  Nippur;  from  the  same  fragment  it  appears  that, 
like  Sar-gali-sarri  and  Sudurkib,  he  bore  only  the  title  "king 
of  Agade,"  and  not  "king  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  world." 

1  No.  3  (list  of  kings).     On  the  Obelisk  of  ManiStusu,  A  MIS,  n,  na-ni  occurs  as  the  name  of 
a  sakanakku. 

2  Scheil's  list  of  kings. 

3  Scheil,  in  CR  191 1,  p.  606,  and,  following  him,  Thureau-Dangin  in  RA  1912,  p.  33,  Hrozny 
in  WZKM  1912,  p.  143,  and  Eduard  Meyer  in  SbKPAW  1912,  p.  1070,  took  a-ba-a-ilum,  as 
they  read,  as  the  name  of  the  sixth  king.    That  the  words,  quoted  above,  do  not  denote  a  name, 
is  evident  from  the  fact  that  in  the  Nippur  list  they  appear  in  Akkadian  translation. 


134  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

Su-dur-kib.1  An  inscription  of  this  king  on  a  small  stone 
disk,  pierced  through  the  centre  by  a  hole,  was  seen  in  the  posses- 
sion of  an  antiquity  dealer  at  Bagdad  by  Pognon  who  gives 
the  following  translation:  "Au  dieu  Nergal,  pour  la  prosperite? 
de  Choudourkib,  roi  de  la  ville  d'Akkadou,  Labatechoum, 
devin  du  palais,  a  consacre."' 

In-ki-( ).  The  fact  that  in  No.  4  in  the  line  following 

in-ki-[.  .  .  .]  we  do  not  find  the  usual  statement  concerning  the 
length  of  the  king's  reign,  may  perhaps  indicate  that  11.  8  if. 
contained  a  statement  similar  to  that  concerning  the  kings 
Igigi,  Imi,  etc.,  of  the  dynasty  of  Akkad,  namely,  that  several 
kings  together  ruled  only  a  short  time.  In  this  case  we  should 
have  to  restore  8in-ki[  lugal]  •[...]..  .-da  [. .  .  .  lugal],  etc.,  x-bi 
y  mu  ib-a. 

E-ir-ri-du-pi-zi-ir,3  en-ri-da-pi-zi-ir.4  A  long  inscription  of 
this  king,  or  rather  a  copy  of  an  original  inscription,  containing 
about  500  lines  of  one  or  two  words  each,  has  been  found  by 
Hilprecht  in  the  Museum  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania5 
and  is  referred  to  by  him  in  BE  Ser.  D,  Vol.  5,  Chapter  IV: 
"An  ancient  king  of  Guti  as  ruler  of  Babylonia."  As  regards 
the  contents,  however,  Hilprecht  states  merely  that  Erridu- 
pizir  several  times  calls  himself  da-num  sar  gu-ti-im  u  ki-ib- 
ra-tim  ar-ba-im,  a  title  proving  that  Erridupizir  is  one  of  the 
missing  kings  of  the  dynasty  of  Gutium.  As  Hilprecht  espe- 
cially notes,  the  king's  name  is  not  written  with  the  determina- 
tive for  god,  which  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the  fact  that 
the  determinative  is  likewise  not  found  before  the  names  of 
Lasirab  and  Sium. 

Si-u-um.  Cf.  the  date  formula  at  the  end  of  the  marble 
tablet  of  Lugal-anna-du(m),  isakku  of  Umma:  14u-ba  si-u-um 
15lugal-gu-ti-umkl-kam  "at  that  time  Si'um  was  king  of  Gutium."6 

1  For  this  reading  which  is  quite  clear  on  the  photograph  of  Scheil's  list  in  RA  1912  facing 
p.  68,  see  Pognon  in  CR  1912,  p.  416. 
1  CR  1912,  p.  416. 
8  Inscription  of  Erridupizir. 
4  Once  in  the  inscription  of  Erridupizir. 
*  Or  in  the  Imperial  Museum  at  Constantinople? 
1  Scheil,  Une  nouvelle  dynastic  sumero-accadienne,  Les  rois  "Guti,"  CR  1911,  pp.  318-327. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  13.5 

The  fact  that  the  isakku  of  Umma  dates  his  tablet  by  referring 
to  a  king  of  Gutium,  proves  that  this  king  ruled  over  southern 
and  therefore  no  doubt  also  over  northern  Babylonia;  as  we 
know  of  no  other  time  when  this  was  the  case,  it  follows  that 
Si'um  was  one  of  the  eleven  kings  of  our  dynasty  of  Gutium. 

La-[s]i-[r]a-ab  is  shown  by  the  language  of  the  inscription 
on  his  battle  mace  (ZA  4,  p.  406)  to  belong  approximately  to 
the  age  of  the  kings  of  Agade;  it  is  therefore  likely  that  he  is 
one  of  the  missing  kings  of  the  dynasty  of  Gutium. 

Sar-a-ti-gu-bi-si-in  is  mentioned  in  the  inscription  of  the 
scribe  nig-ul-PA-e  of  Jokha1  in  the  phrase  nam-ti  sar-a-ti-gu- 
bi-si-in  lugal-na-su  "for  the  life  of  Sar'atigubisin,  his  king  (or 
lord)."  Although  Sar'atigubisin  is  not  given  the  title  "King 
of  Gutium"  in  this  inscription,  nevertheless  he  may  be  one 
of  the  missing  kings  of  Gutium,  since  the  name  seems  to  be 
neither  Semitic  nor  Sumerian.2 

Ti-ri-ga-a-an,3  ti-riq-qa-an4  is  proved  by  the  inscription  of 
Utu-hegal5  to  have  been  the  last  of  the  kings  of  Gutium  who 
ruled  over  Babylonia.  An  allusion  to  the  overthrow  of  the 
king  which  is  described  by  Utu-hegal,  is  found  in  an  unpub- 
lished divination  text  of  the  time  of  the  Seleucides  reading 
ES-BAR  ti-riq-qa-an  sarri  sa  ina  qabal  umma(n)-ni-su  HA- 
A-iq  (=  ih(ta)liq)  "omen  of  Tiriqqan  the  king  who  perished  in 
the  midst  of  his  troups."6  Cf.  also  al-ti-ri-qa-an,  kudurru  of 
Nazimaruttas  i24.7 

Lugal-an-na-mu-un-du,8  lugal-an-na-mu-un-du.9  See 
Chapter  VII. 

1  Thureau-Dangin,  RA  1912,  p.  73  ff. 

2  If,  after  all,  the  name  should  be  Semitic,  the  meaning  would  be  "king  of  the  .      .  .  of  their 
(i.  e.,  the  nations') " 

3  Inscription  of  Utu-hegal. 

4  Unpublished  divination  text,  Thureau-Dangin,  RA  1912,  p.  120. 

5  Thureau-Dangin,  RA  1912,  p.  in  ff. 

6  Thureau-Dangin,  RA  1912,  p.  120. 

7  Scheil,  TES  1,  p.  86ff. 

8  BE  VI,  2,  No.  130. 

9  HOT  75.     Since  this  inscription  and  that  mentioned  in  the  preceding  note  are  evidently 
copies  of  one  and  the  same  original  inscription,  it  follows  that  one  of  the  variant  writings  of  the 
name  is  due  to  faulty  copying,  the  name  in  the  original  inscription  being  probably  written  with 

VOL.  IV. 


136  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

d 


^-bi-^sin,1  i-bi-dsin.2  According  to  an  unpublished  omen 
text  in  the  British  Museum3  Ibi-Sin  was  led  into  captivity  to 
Ansan,4  the  later  Persis.5  Since  the  time  of  Dungi  the  countries 
east  of  Babylonia  had  been  subject  to  the  kings  of  Ur,  although 
the  subjugation  of  the  more  distant  regions,  as,  e.  g.,  Ansan, 
never  seems  to  have  been  very  thorough,  and  uprisings  against 
the  Babylonians  were  quite  frequent.  The  date  formulas, 
however,  show  that  these  eastern  countries  were  always  brought 
anew  into  subjection  by  a  military  expedition,  Ansan  itself 
being  more  than  nine  times  the  objective  of  such  expeditions. 
In  the  last  years  of  Ibi-Sin,  however,  one  of  the  native  nobles 
of  Ansan  must  have  succeeded  in  establishing  the  independence 
of  the  eastern  countries,  and  by  an  invasion  into  Babylonia 
even  brought  to  an  end  the  kingdom  of  Ur. 

Important  light  is  shed  on  this  last  period  of  the  kingdom 
of  Ur  by  an  unpublished  Nippur  text  containing  an  address  to 
the  god  Enlil  in  which  evidently  the  king  of  Ur  complains 
that  Is-bi-ir-ra,  the  man  of  Mari  (  =  lu-ma-rikl),  has  devastated 
the  country  as  far  as  Ur.  Isbi-Irra  is  the  founder  of  the  king- 
dom of  I  sin  which  followed  that  of  Ur,  and  which  by  this  new 
text  is  shown  to  have  had  its  origin  in  a  kingdom  or  probably 
a  principality  of  Mari,  the  well-known,  yet  unidentified,  city 
on  the  Euphrates  to  the  northwest  of  Babylonia.  This  state 
of  Mari,  we  may  suppose,  made  itself  independent  under  Ibi- 
Sin,  perhaps  at  the  same  time  as  Ansan  in  the  East,  and  by  its 
bold  attacks  on  Babylonia,  as  attested  by  the  text  just  referred 
to,  evidently  became  an  important  factor  in  bringing  about 

du,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  writing  of  lugal-an-na-du,  e-an-na-du,  etc.  Apparently  the  variant 
was  caused  by  the  fact  that  the  inscription  was  dictated  to  the  scribe;  it  is,  however,  most 
valuable,  because  it  proves  the  pronunciation  du  for  DU  in  this  name  as  well  as  in  the  names 
lugal-an-na-du,  en-an-na-du,  e-an-na-du,  etc.,  which  are  compounded  with  the  participle  du 
instead  of  the  finite  verbal  form  mundu. 

1  Inscriptions  and  date  formulas  of  Ibi-Sin. 

2  Nippur  list  of  kings,  No.  5. 

3  Rm  2,  174,  referred  to  by  Boissier,  Choix  II,  p.  64. 

4  Boissier,  1.  c.,  Ibi-Sin  "que  1'oracle  annonce  devoir  etre  emmene  prisonnier  en  Elam 
(AN-DU-ANk1)." 

8  See  Chapter  VI. 


A.    POEBEL — NEW    LISTS   OF    KINGS  137 

the  final  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Ur  by  the  AnSanites, 
the  fruit  of  which  eventually  fell  to  ISbi-Irra  himself,  who 
erected  the  kingdom  of  I3in  on  the  ruins  of  that  of  Ur. 

"Is-bi-ir-ra,1  is-bi-ir-ra,2  i3-bi-dir-ra.3  The  fact  that  Mari 
was  the  home  city  of  ISbi-Irra  very  satisfactorily  explains  the 
important  role  which  Dagan,  the  supreme  god  of  the  regions 
along  the  middle  course  of  the  Euphrates,  seems  to  have  played 
in  the  royal  family,  the  names  of  two  of  its  members  being 
compounded  with  the  name  of  this  god.4 

dLi-bi-it-istar,5  li-bi-it-istar,6  li-bit-di§-tar7,  is,  according  to 
No.  5,  the  son  of  his  predecessor  Isme-Dagan,  but  according 
to  No.  2  the  son  of  Idin-Dagan,  which  would  make  him  the 
brother  of  his  predecessor.  As  at  present  neither  of  the  two 
statements  is  supported  by  other  evidence,  it  is  not  possible  to 
decide  which  is  correct. 

dUr-dnin-IB,8  ur-dnin-IB9,  is,  according  to  No.  2,  the  son 

of  dlskur-  ,  of  whom  we  know  nothing.  From  the 

omission  of  his  father's  name  in  list  No.  5,  as  well  as  from  the 
fact  that  at  about  this  time  there  existed  an  independent  king- 
dom of  Ur  under  Gungunum,  it  has  been  concluded  that  this 
break  in  the  succession  of  the  kings  was  caused  by  political 
disturbances,  which  placed  a  new  family  on  the  throne  of  Isin. 
This  conclusion  is  entirely  confirmed  by  the  new  list  of  kings 
No.  2;  for  although  the  passage  following  Ur-NinlB's  name 


1  Inscriptions  of  Isbi-Irra  (4  R235,  79). 

2  BS  15419. 

3  List  of  kings  No.  5.     The  determinative  for  god  before  the  divine  name  Irra  shows  that 
this  list  belongs  to  the  time  of  the  successors  of  Samsu-iluna. 

4  For  the  connection  of  Dagan  with  the  regions  along  the  middle  course  of  the  Euphrates 
compare  CH  4  24mu-ka-an-ni-iS  28da-ad-mi  26nar  purattim  27li-tum  dda-gan  Mba-ni-Su.     Accord- 
ing to  the  inscription  published  by  Condamin  in  ZA  21,  p.  247,  §ams"i-Adad  of  ASSur  built,  or 
rebuilt,  the  temple  of  Dagan  at  Tirqa,  evidently  the  chief  temple  of  the  city;  note  that  the  king 
mentions  his  relation  to  Dagan  between  the  titles  "vicegerent  of  Enlil"  and  "iSakku  of  ASSur;" 
"LUGAL-KIS"  'sa-ki-in  den-li!  <pa-li-ih  dda-gan  BISA(G)  dA-US"UR. 

5  Inscriptions  of  Libit-Is"tar;  No.  2  (list  of  kings). 

6  No.  5  (list  of  kings). 

7  CT  13,  45,  Col.  1 4. 

8  List  of  kings  No.  2  Col.  \QV;  brick  from  Nippur,  OBI  181. 

9  List  of  kings  No.  5  Col.  4(t3)u;  inscription  No.  68  Col.  2ie' 


138  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

is  too  broken  to  allow  of  any  definite  explanation,  yet  the  word 
bal  "dynasty"  in  Column  8i2  is  sufficient  proof  that  it  dealt  with 
the  overthrow  of  the  ruling  family.  We  are,  however,  still 
entirely  in  the  dark  as  to  whether  this  change  was  preceded 
by  a  period  of  decline  in  the  royal  power  under  Libit-Istar, 
or  whether  it  was  brought  about  by  a  sudden  catastrophe. 
On  the  whole,  it  is  more  likely  that  the  latter  was  the  case. 
Probably  it  was  at  this  juncture  that  Gungunum  of  Ur  made 
himself  independent  and  established  his  rule  over  the  lower 
part  of  southern  Babylonia  from  Ur  to  Lagas  in  which  latter 
city  the  high  priest  Enannaduma,  son  of  King  Isme-Dagan, 
built  the  sutummu  of  Nanna  for  the  life  of  Gungunum.1 

Like  most  usurpers  Ur-Nin  IB  was  evidently  an  energetic 
personality  who  soon  succeeded  not  only  in  overthrowing 
Gungunum  and  restoring  the  kingdom  of  Isin  to  its  former 
power,  but  even  engaged  in  successful  campaigns  against  the 
country  of  Zabsali  in  the  east  and  the  Su-people  in  the  west, 
and  therefore  was  the  only  king  of  Isin,  as  far  as  we  know,  who 
could  lay  claim  to  the  proud  title  "king  of  the  four  quarters 
of  the  world."  See  Chapter  VIII. 

dlr-ra-i-mi-ti,2  dir-ra-ZAG-LU(  =  imittu/i).3  From  the  date 
formula  on  a  tablet  from  Nippur,4  which  runs  mu  dir-ra-i-mi-ti 
lugal-e  nibrukl  ki-bi  bi-in-gi-a,5  we  learn  that  Irra-imitti 
restored  the  city  of  Nippur.  It  follows  from  this,  of  course, 
that  previous  to  the  restoration  Nippur  had  been  destroyed 
in  warfare,  but  whether  this  happened  in  the  course  of  an  inva- 
sion of  Babylonia  by  one  of  the  neighboring  nations  or  in  the 

1  Cf.  clay  nail  of  Eannaduma  from  Mugheir. 

2  Tablets  from  Nippur;  list  of  kings  No.  5.     In  the  former  the  sign  for  deity  belongs  to  the 
whole  name,  the  divine  name  ir-ra  being  written  without  the  determinative  for  god;    in  the 
latter  it  belongs,  as  in  iS-bi-  ir-ra,  II.  8  and  9,  to  ir-ra,  since  in  list  No.  5  the  names  of  the  kings 
of  Isin  are  not  written  with  the  determinative  for  god. 

3  King,  Chronicles,  No.  26472,  Rev.g. 

4  B$494i.    The  tablet  will  be  published  by  Dr.  Ed.  Chiera  as  No.  19  of  his  volume  on  "Legal 
and  Administrative  Documents  chiefly  from  the  Dynasties  of  Isin  and  Larsa." 

5  "Year  in  which  Irra-imitti,  the  king,  after  having  restored  to  its  place  the  city  of  Nippur, 


A.    POEBEL — NEW   LISTS  OF   KINGS  139 

course  of  an  internal  revolt,  we  cannot  say  at  present.  It  will 
be  observed  that  Irra-imitti  is  not  the  son  of  his  predecessor 
Iter-pisa,1  and,  therefore,  we  can  safely  assume  that  Irra-imitti's 
accession  to  the  throne  of  I  sin  was  in  some  way  connected  with 
the  political  troubles  during  which  Nippur  suffered  the  destruc- 
tion mentioned  above,  the  revolt  perhaps  being  led  by  Irra- 
imitti  himself.  At  any  rate,  we  thus  obtain  at  least  a  glimpse 
into  the  events  which  no  doubt  contributed  to  the  decline  of  the 
political  power  of  the  kingdom  of  I  sin  during  the  latter  half 
of  its  existence,  for  the  dominion  of  the  later  kings,  probably 
beginning  with  the  time  of  Irra-imitti  himself,  but  certainly 
with  the  time  of  Enlil-bani,  seems  to  have  been  restricted  to 
the  territories  of  Nippur  and  I  sin,  as  will  be  shown  more  at 
length  in  Chapter  IX. 

dDa-mi-iq-i-li-su,2  da-mi-iq-i-li-su,3  dam-ki-i-li-su.4  For  the 
historical  material  to  be  derived  from  the  inscriptions  and 
date  formulas  (date-list  No.  70),  see  Chapter  IX.  Note  that 
the  dates  of  Rim-Sin  mention  a  city  Uru-da-mi-iq-i-li-su,5 
URlf'-dam-ki-i-li-su.6 

dWarad-dsin,7  warad-dsin.8  Note  the  city  Uru(or  51)- 
warad-dsin  mentioned  on  a  tablet  dated  under  Rim-Sin.9 

dRi-im-dsin,10  ri-im-dsin,n  ri-im-sin,12  rim-dsin,13  son  of  Kudur- 
mabuk  and,  therefore,  brother  of  King  Warad  Sin.  A  sister 

1  This  follows  from  the  fact  that  the  king-list  No.  5  does  not  designate  him  as  the  son  of 
Iter-piSa. 

2  Inscriptions  and  date  formulas  of  Damiq-ilisu. 

3  King-list  No.  5  and  in  uru-da-mi-iq-i-li-su,  dates  of  Rim-Sin. 

4  In  URUkl(  =  al)-dam-ki-i-H-iu,  date  of  Rim-Sin. 

*  Mu  uru!-d[a]-mi-iq-i-li-[su]   |   [ ],    B?   (Strassmayer,   Warka,  No.  23); 

mu  uru-da-mi-iq-1-li-su  |  mu-KU-bi,  "year  in  which  (Rim-Sin,  the  king),  after  having  taken 
Al-Damiq-ilisu,  —  — ,"  Nippur  tablet. 

6  URUkl-dam-ki-i-li-s'u  in  the  date  of  Rim-Sin,  AO  5478  (RA  VIII,  p.  82);  see  Chapter  IX. 

7  Inscriptions  of  Warad-Sin. 

8  Inscriptions  of  Kudurmabuk  (brick  from   Mugheir,  CT  21,  33,  and  clay  nail,  RA  IX. 
p.  122);   inscriptions  of  Warad-Sin  (brick  and  clay  nail  from  Mugheir). 

9  Thureau-Dangin,  RA  IX,  p.  82. 

10  Inscriptions  of  Rim-Sin,  Kudur  mabuk,  etc.;  date  formulas  of  Rim-Sin. 

11  Date  formulas  of  Rim-Sin  (from  the  first  period  of  his  reign);  date  formula  of  the  thirty- 
first  year  of  Hammu-rabi. 

12  Date  formula  H-r  31  (VAT  666,  Ungnad  BA  VI4,  p.  2). 
"Chronicle  B.M.  96152,  Obv.j  (King,  Chronicles  II,  p.  123). 


140  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

of  his,  a  priestess,  by  the  name  of  BILF-AN-KAL-UL  is,  accord- 
ing to  Scheil,1  mentioned  on  a  clay  cylinder  of  Nabu-na'id.2 

One  of  his  wives  was   SI[ ]-dnanna,   daughter  of   eri- 

dnanna;3  another,  dri-im-dsin-dsa-la-ba-as-ta-su,  daughter  of  a 
certain  Sin-magir.4  A  daughter  of  Rim-Sin  bore  the  name 
Liris-gamlum5. 

1CR  1912,  p.  680. 

2  In  the  possession  of  Messrs.  Messayeh,  Bagdad-New  York. 

3  Stone  tablet  B  Obv.  13SI[ ]-dnanna  14dam-ki-ag  15dri-im-dsin  Rev' 1  lugal-larsamkl-ma 

2dumu-sal  evi-dnanna-ge.     She  built  the  £-a-ag-ga-kili-Gr-ur  of  Nin-e-gal. 

4  Inscription  of  Rim-Sin-Sala-bas'tas'u,  in  the  possession  of  Messrs.  Messayeh  13>  H  dri-im- 
dsin-d5a-la-ba-a?-ta-5u  15dam-ki-ag  dri-im-dsin  16dumu-sal  dsin-ma-gir-ge.      This  sin-magir  is,  of 
course,  not  the  king-of  Isin,  who,  without  doubt,  would   have  been  given  his  full  titles  by  his 
daughter. 

6  Ibidem:    12Q  li-ri-i§-ga-am-lum  dumu-sal-a-ni. 


Ill 


A  HISTORY  OF  THE  TUMMAL  OF  NINLIL 

AT  NIPPUR 

No.  6 
TRANSLITERATION 

Beginning  broken  off. 
Obv.     [  ...................  ] 


il  tum-ma-a]lki-su  in-tum 
[a-DU]-2-kam  tum-ma-alkl  ba-sub 
[dGI]S-BIL-ga-mes-e  GUG-bur-ra 
[(e-)]-den-lil-la  in-du 

5'  [...]..-  lugal  dumu  dGI$-BIL-ga-mes-ge 
[tu]m-ma-alki  SI  -PA-BlL-i-e 
[d]nin-lil  tum-ma-alkl-su  in-tum 
[a-D]U-3-kam  tum-ma-alkl  ba-sub 
[AN-n]a-ni  GlS-SAR-mah  e-den-lil-la  in-du 
10    [  ......  ].  .  .  -  dnanna  dumu  AN-na-ni-ge 

[tum-ma-alki  SI-]PA-BIL-i-e 
[dnin-lil  tum-ma]-alkl-su  in-tum 
[a-DU-4-kam  tum-ma-alkl  ba-sub 
Rev.     [ur-den-gur-ge  e-kur  in-]du 
[dun-gi  dumu  ur-dengur]-ge 
[tum-ma-alkiSI.PA.BIL]-i-e 
[dnin-Hl  turn-ma-all^-Su  in-tum 
5    [a-DU-5-kam  tum-ma-alki  ba-Sub 
[...  dAMAR-dsin-  ...].  -ta 
[en-na  dAMAR-dsin  lug]al-e 
[en-am-gal-an-na  en-dinn]anna-unukl-ga 
[mas-e  in-p]a-de 

(143) 


144  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

10    [dnin-lil  tum-ma-aPj'-su  (n)i-lah-en1 
[dis-bi-ir-ra  e-kur-ra-igi-ga]l-la 
[e-gi-na-ab-du2  den-lil-]la  in-du 
[i(nim)-lu-dinnanna-A$GAB3-gal-den-lil-la-su-sjar-ra 

No.  7 

Obv.    ,  ur-dengur-ge  e-kur  in-du 

dun-gi  dumu  ur-dengur-ge 

tum-ma-alki  E?-PA?-BIL-i-e 

dnin-lil  tum-ma-alkl-su  in-tum 
5  a-DU-5-kam  tum-ma-alkl  ba?-sub 

[.]....  dAMAR?-dsin-ka-ta 

[e]n-na  d[AMAR?]-dsin  lugal-[e] 

[e]n-am-gal-a[n-n]a  en-dinnanna-unukj-ga 

mas-e  in-pa-da 
10  dnin-lil  tum-ma-alkl-sia 
(n)i-lah 

i-lu-dinnanna 

ASG  A  B-gal-den-lil-la-3ii-sar-ra 

dis-bi-ir-ra 
Rev.        e-kur-ra-igi-gal-la 

e-gi-na-ab-du4  den-lil-la  in-du 

1  En  is  probably  mistake;  cf.  No.  7. 

2  Or  Sutum. 

3  For  this  sign  see  Meissner,  OLZ  191 1,  Col.  385. 

4  Or  §utum. 


A.    POEBEL — A    HISTORY   OF   THE   TUMMAL  OF    MM  II  145 


TRANSLATION 

Beginning  broken  off. 

Obv.      (and)  led  Ninlil  into  the  Tummal. 

A  second  time,  after  the  Tummal  had  been  destroyed, 
Gilgames  built  the  GUG-burra  of  the  house  of  Enlil 

5  (and) -lugal,  the  son  of  Gilgames', 

ed  the  Tummal  anew 

(and)  led  Ninlil  into  the  Tummal. 

A    third    time,    after   the   Tummal    had   (again)    been 

destroyed, 
Annani  built  the  GlS-SAR-mah  of  the  house  of  Enlil 

10  (and) -Nanna,  the  son  of  Annani, 

ed  the  Tummal  anew 

(and)  led  Ninlil  into  the  Tummal. 

A  fourth   time,   after  the  Tummal   had   (again)   been 

destroyed, 
Rev.       Ur-Engur  built  Ekur 

(and)  Dungi,  the  son  of  Ur-Engur, 

ed  the  Tummal  anew 

(and)  led  Ninlil  into  the  Tummal. 

5  A   fifth    time,    after    the   Tummal    had    (again)    been 
destroyed, 

from  the of  AMAR-Sin 

to  (the  year)  in  which  AMAR-Sin,  the  king, 

invested 

En-am-gal-nun-na,  the  high  priest  of  I  Star  of  Uruk, 

10  Ninlil  went  to  the  Tummal. 

11  According  to  the  word  which  was  sent  to  Lu-Innanna, 

the  chief  aSkap  of  Enlil, 
13  Bbi-Irra  built  E-kurra-igi-galla, 
the  sutummu  of  Ninlil. 


146  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

The  Tummal  mentioned  in  our  text  is  a  certain  quarter 
of  the  city  or  of  the  sacred  precinct  of  Nippur,  as  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  it  is  provided  with  the  determinative  ki. 
Evidently  it  is  the  district  sacred  to  Ninlil,  since  in  our  text 
this  goddess  is  led  or  carried  into  the  Tummal;  moreover, 
according  to  CT  24,  5  Col.  29,  22168  and  39i3(!),  she  bore  the 
name  "NIN-TUM-MA-AL1  "Lady  of  the  Tummal,"2  and  her 
sacred  boat,  according  to  K  4378  Col.  524,  was  called  BlSma- 
tum-ma-al  "the  boat  of  Tummal."  In  5  R  2i22e.d  tum-ma-al 
is  translated  ku-se-ra-tu,  which  is  the  plural  of  ku-se-ru,  by 
which  the  preceding  line  translates  the  Sumerian  ku-se-ir; 
the  meaning  of  this  word,  however,  is  at  present  no  less  dark 
than  that  of  tummal  itself.  This  much,  however,  is  certain 
from  this  translation  that  tummal  was  not  merely  a  proper 
name,  but  had  an  appellative  meaning.  The  Tummal,  written 
as  in  our  case  with  the  determinative  ki,  also  occurs  in  the 
tablets  from  Drehem3  and  Telloh4  as  a  certain  locality  in  these 
cities,  a  fact  which  corroborates  the  conclusion  just  drawn. 

At  the  beginning  of  our  text  apparently  only  one  section 
is  missing,  namely,  that  relating  the  first  construction  of  the 
Tummal,  for  the  words  a-DU-2-kam  do  evidently  not  belong 
to  the  sentence  "the  Tummal  was  destroyed,"  in  which  case 
it  would  be  necessary  to  assume  another  missing  section  dealing 
with  the  first  decline  or  destruction  and  subsequent  restoration 
of  the  Tummal;  they  have,  no  doubt,  to  be  taken  together  with 
the  verbs  in-du  "he  built"  and  i-e  "he.  .  .  .ed"  in  the  sentences 
following  the  phrase  tummal  basub,  which  latter  therefore  has 
to  be  taken  as  a  kind  of  parenthetical  retrospective  description 
and  for  this  reason  has  been  translated  above  as  a  temporal 
clause  with  the  verb  in  the  pluperfect. 

Concerning  the  various  buildings  or  parts  of  the  Tummal 

1  CT  24,  5  Col.  29  has  a  gloss  e-gi  between  N1N  and  TUM,  but  whether  this  gloss  refers 
to  the  whole  name  or  only  to  TUM-MA-AL,  we  cannot  say.     Is  e-gi  perhaps  a  mistake  for 
e-ri-es?     In  this  case  we  should  read  deres-tum-ma-al. 

2  In  her  character  as  Ninlil  sa  nise,  according  to  the  last  mentioned  passage. 

3  De  Genouillac,  Tablettes  de  Drehem,  556011;   55787. 

4  E.  g.,  Reisner,  Tempelurkunden  1 54  Col.  2i8. 


A.    POEBEL — A    HISTORY   OF  THE   TUMMAL  OF   NINLIL  147 

and  of  the  temple  of  Enlil  mentioned  in  our  history,  namely, 
the  GUG-bur-ra  of  the  house  of  Enlil,  the  GlS-SAR-mah, 
i.  e.,  "the  sublime  garden,"  of  the  house  of  Enlil,  and  the  e*-gi- 
na-ab-du  of  Enlil  we  know  practically  nothing.  In  the  vocabu- 
lary, No.  1 06  Col.  62i,  e-gi-na-ab-du  is  translated  Su-tu-um-mu 
which  usually  has  been  given  the  meaning  of  "granary,"  though 
this  is  probably  wrong.1  According  to  the  passage  just  men- 
tioned, the  Sumerian  pronunciation  is  [Su-jtu-um,  the  Akkadian 
sutummu  therefore  being  a  loan  word  from  the  Sumerian; 
the  fact,  however,  that  we  also  find  the  writing  e-gi-na-ab- 
dum2  instead  of  e-gi-na-ab-du,  seems  to  indicate  that  the 
Sumerians  also  read  phonetically  e-ginabdu  and  e-ginabdum.3 
According  to  his  clay  cone  Enannaduma  built  a  sutum  for 
Samas  at  Ur,  calling  it  "his,"  i.  e.,  Samas's,  "holy  Sutum," 
sutum-azag-ga-ni,  which  corresponds  entirely  to  the  Su-tu-um-mi 
el-lim  in  Gilg.  Ep.  I,  Col.  h0. 

The  GlS-SAR-mah  of  the  house  of  Enlil  is  no  doubt  the 
sacred  garden  of  Enlil,  but  as  it  is  "built,"  it  must  at  the  same 
time  be  some  kind  of  a  structure.  Since  it  is  expressly  stated 
that  it  is  the  garden  "of  the  house  of  Enlil,"  the  explanation 
suggests  itself  that  it  formed  part  of  the  house  itself  which  it 
will  be  remembered  mythologically  represented  a  mountain, 
as  is  indicated  by  its  name  E-kur.  This  garden  of  Enlil  may 
then  perhaps  be  compared,  at  least  in  some  respects,  with  the 
gigunu  of  Aiia,  of  which  Hammurabi  in  the  introduction  to 
his  code  of  laws,  Col.  226-28,  says  that  he  clad  it  in  "green," 
i.  e.,  "green  plants,"4  etc. 

1  Notice,  e.  g.,  that  GilgameS  is  said  to  have  built  the  holy  Sutummu  (Sutummi  ellim)  Eanna; 
Sutummu  is  here  evidently  in  apposition  to  Eanna,  contrary  to  the  view  of  Jensen,  KB  VI.  2. 
p.  424;  but  even  if  this  be  not  the  case,  the  co-ordination  of  Eanna  and  the  Sutummu  seems  to 
exclude  a  meaning  "granary." 

2  Enannaduma,  clay  cone  from  Ur. 

3  Or  is  the  dum  in  e-gi-na-ab-dum  simply  due  to  the  influence  of  the  pronunciation  Sutum? 

4  A  translation  "grave"  for  gigunu  in  the  passage  mentioned  above,  is  entirely  unwarranted, 
although  conversely  a  grave  might  at  times  very  well  be  called  a  gigunu. 


IV 
TRANSCRIPTION  OF  EN-SAKUS-ANNA 


TRANSCRIPTION  OF  EN-SAKUS-ANNA 


RECONSTRUCTED  TEXT 


dEn-lil 

lugal-kur-kur-ra 

en-sa-kus-an-na 

en  ki-en-gi 

lugal  kalam-ma 

ft  dingir-ri-ne 

e-na-NI-es-a 

kis(i)ki 

mu-hul 

en-bi-esdar 

lugal  kis(i)ki 

mu-KU 

lu  !-upikl-ka-ge 
lu-kis(i)ki-ge 
uru  na-ga-hul-a! 


[gis-]  nig-ga 


]-ne 


Lacuna 

[su-ne-jne-a1 
mu-ne-gi1 

alan-bi 

ku-za-gin-bi 


To  Enlil, 

lord  of  the  countries: 

En-sakus-anna, 

lord  of  Kengi, 

king  of  Kalam, 

when  the  gods 

had to  him, 

and  he  had  devastated 

Kis 

and  captured 

Enbi-lstar 

king  of  Kis, 

the  man  of  Upi 

(and)  the  man  of  Kis, 

in  order  that  the  cities  he 

might  not  destroy, 
their(?) ....  and  their  (?) 
property 


Lacuna 

into  their  hands 

he  returned, 
(but)  their  statues, 
their   precious   metal   and   pre- 
cious stones, 


1  The  plural  pronouns  refer  to  the  man  of  Upi  and  the  man  of  Ki5. 
Vot..  IV.  (151) 


152  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

gis-nig-ga-bi  their  wood(en  utensils)  and  fur- 

niture 

den-lil-la1  he  presented 

a-mu-na-ru  to  Enlil. 

The  small  fragment  of  a  vase  published  as  No.  29  is  of 
great  historical  value  because  it  proves  that  two  sets  of  frag- 
mentary vase  inscriptions  already  known2  form  part  of  a  single 
inscription,  thereby  enabling  us  to  establish  the  important 
fact  that  the  kings  En-sakus-anna  and  Enbi-Istar  were  con- 
temporaries and  opponents  in  the  war  which  ended  with  the 
capture  of  Enbi-Istar  and  the  devastation  of  Kis.  It  will  be 
seen  that  the  inscription  existed  in  a  shorter  and  a  longer  ver- 
sion; the  text  of  the  former  is  now  completely  recovered,  while 
of  the  latter  only  a  few  lines  are  missing.3  The  fragment 
No.  28  is  published  here,  because  it  helps  to  establish  the  correct 
reading  and  interpretation  of  a  passage  heretofore  only  frag- 
mentarily  known. 

From  the  text  as  now  recovered  we  see  that  at  the  time 
when  the  inscriptions  were  written,  or  at  least  shortly  before, 
Babylonia  was  divided  into  a  southern  and  a  northern  king- 
dom. Judging  from  the  Semitic  name  of  the  northern  king 
and  the  Sumerian  name  of  the  southern  king,  this  conflict 
between  North  and  South  was  clearly  one  of  different  races, 
the  Semitic  element  predominating  in  the  North,  the  Sumerians 
in  the  South.  The  capital  of  the  northern  state  was  Kis  as 
follows  from  the  title  of  Enbi-Istar,  but  an  equally  important 
city  of  the  latter's  kingdom  was  Upi;  it  will  be  remembered 
that  this  city  is  mentioned  in  the  same  close  connection  with 
Kis  in  the  inscriptions  of  Eannadu  of  Lagas  in  which  he  relates 

1  dEn-lil-la  from  den-lil-ra;  for  the  assimilation  of  the  dative  r  to  a  preceding  1  and  for  the 
writing  of  the  resulting  syllable  la  with  the  sign  la,  not  la,  see  my  article:  "Die  Genetivkon- 
struction  im  Sumerischen"  in  Babyloniaca  IV,  p.  oo. 

2 OBI  102 — 105,  no;  OBI  90-92. 

3  The  additional  text  of  the  longer  inscription  is  marked  by  indentation  in  the  translitera- 
tion and  translation. 


A.    POEBEL— TRANSCRIPTION   OF    EN-$AKU$-ANNA  153 

his  various  encounters  with  the  king  of  KiS  and  Upi.  En-SakuS- 
anna,  the  southern  ruler,  on  the  other  hand,  styles  himself 
"lord  of  kengi"  and  "king  of  the  land."  The  latter  title  is 
likewise  borne  by  Lugal-zaggisi  in  his  vase  inscriptions,  where 
it  follows  the  title  "king  of  Uruk,"  as  well  as  by  Sarru-kin  of 
Agade  besides  his  other  titles  "king  of  Kis"'  and  "king  of 
Agade."  It  will  be  shown  in  Chapter  VI  that  by  adopting 
the  title  "king  of  the  land"  the  latter  king  evidently  desired 
to  designate  himself  as  ruler  over  Southern  Babylonia  and 
as  legal  successor  to  Lugal-zaggisi,  while  his  title  king  of  KiS 
lays  claim  to  the  rights  of  the  north  Babylonian  kingdom. 
Kalam  "the  land"  is  itself  a  designation  of  Southern  Babylonia, 
the  same  as  kengi,  which,  moreover,  is  probably  the  same 
word  as  kalam.1  The  titles  en  ki-en-gi  and  lugal  kalam-ma, 
if  taken  in  their  strictest  sense,  express  therefore  a  claim  to 
dominion  over  identical  territories;  nevertheless,  the  mere 
fact  that  they  appear  side  by  side  as  titles  of  En-sakus-anna 
is  sufficient  proof  that  there  was  an  actual  difference  between 
them.  In  fact,  taking  together  all  evidence  concerning  the 
use  of  kengi  and  kalam  in  the  various  royal  titles,  there  can 
be  hardly  any  doubt  that  the  nam-en  ki-en-gi  denotes  the 
dominion  over  Southern  Babylonia  as  conferred  upon  the 
ruler  by  Enlil,  the  god  of  Nippur,  while  the  title  lugal  kalam-ma 
goes  together  with  the  kingship  or  enship  of  Uruk,  the  city  of 
An  and  Innanna.  As  to  ki-en-gi  compare,  e.  g.,  the  equation 
ki-en-gi  =  nibrukl  in  King,  STC  I,  p.  217,  1.  5;  the  connection 
of  the  nam-lugal  kalam-ma  with  Uruk,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
clear  from  Lugal-zaggisi's  titles  lugal-unukl  lugal-kalam-ma, 
as  well  as  from  the  fact  that  Sarru-kin  couples  the  latter  with 
the  religious  title  "pasisu  of  Anu,"  while  his  title  "king  of  Kis"' 
bears  the  same  relation  to  the  religious  title  "vicegerent  of 
Innanna  (of  Kis)." 

1  Cf.  the  dialectical  form  (Eme-sal)  kanag(g)  for  kalam(m)  "land."  Kengi.  stem  kengir, 
must  be  a  very  old  form  of  a  third  Sumerian  dialect,  and  was  preserved  only  as  a  geographical 
name  in  the  classical  idiom  (and  even  as  such  only  as  archaism,  because  the  more  modern  kalam 
was  used  in  the  same  geographical  meaning). 


154  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

Although  both  en  and  lugal  mean  "lord,"  yet  en  is  used 
exclusively  as  a  hierocratic  title  which  may  be  rendered  as 
"princely  high  priest,"  while  lugal  is  employed  as  purely  social 
or  political  title.  We  may  perhaps  conclude  that  En-sakus- 
anna  was  originally  en  of  kengi  and  became  king  of  the  land 
only  after  the  conquest  of  Uruk,  a  conclusion  which  finds  a 
strong  support  in  the  fact  that  he  bears  a  typical  high  priestly 
name  beginning  with  the  word  en  "lord,"  i.  e.,  "high  priest," 
followed  by  a  substantive,  which  stands  in  apposition  to  en 
and  is  usually  connected  with  an  adjective,  and  by  the  genitive 
anna,  "of  Heaven"  or  "of  Anu,"  which  is  dependent  on  the 
mentioned  substantive.  Unfortunately  En-sakus-anna  himself, 
in  his  inscriptions,  gives  us  no  direct  information  in  which  of 
the  Babylonian  cities  he  began  his  career;  this,  however,  seems 
certain  that,  just  as  in  the  case  of  Lugal-zaggisi,  Uruk  was  con- 
sidered by  him  the  natural  capital  of  his  kingdom. 

The  war  between  En-sakus-anna  and  King  Enbi-Istar  of 
Kis  led  to  the  capture  of  the  city  of  Ki<>  and  of  Enbi-Istar 
himself.  However,  whether  this  brought  about  the  complete 
overthrow  of  the  northern  kingdom  we  cannot  say  with  cer- 
tainty, though  it  seems  to  be  likely,  at  least  for  a  short  period. 
According  to  the  shorter  inscriptions  the  city  of  Kis  was  devas- 
tated by  En-sakus-anna;  but  according  to  the  passage  which 
is  found  only  in  the  longer  inscriptions,  the  citizens  of  Upi  and 
Kis  offered  him  all  their  movable  possessions  that  he  might  not 
destroy  their  cities,  and  although  the  next  lines  unfortunately 
are  missing,  nevertheless  the  mere  fact  that  En-sakus-anna 
mentions  this  incident  in  his  inscriptions,  evidently  indicates 
that  he  granted  their  request.  When  the  inscription  again 
sets  in,  we  read  that  he  returned  something,  apparently  their 
cities,  to  them,  but  all  the  sculptures,  the  precious  metal,  the 
precious  stones  and  all  kinds  of  goods  he  carried  away  and 
presented  them,  or  at  least  a  part  of  them,  to  the  temple  of 
Enlil  at  Nippur. 

This  testimony  for  the  practice  of  carrying  away  the 
sculptures  from  conquered  cities  is  very  interesting,  as  it  shows 


A.    POEBEL— TRANSCRIPTION    OF    EN-$AKU$-ANNA  155 

that  such  works  of  art  were  highly  valued  by  the  Babylonians; 
in  fact,  in  our  inscriptions  they  are  mentioned  even  before 
gold,  silver  and  precious  stones. 

The  approximate  time  of  En-SakuS-anna  and  Enbi-IStar, 
at  least  with  regard  to  the  Babylonian  dynasties  now  known, 
can  be  determined  with  sufficient  certainty  by  the  following 
considerations.  First,  it  is  impossible  to  place  the  two  kings 
in  the  period  of  453  years  which  elapsed  between  the  beginning 
of  the  dynasty  of  Dpi  and  the  end  of  the  dynasty  of  Uruk 
following  that  of  Agade,  because  either  En-sakus-anna  as  ruler 
of  Southern  Babylonia  or  Enbi-Istar  as  ruler  of  Northern 
Babylonia  would  be  mentioned  among  the  kings  of  the  ruling 
dynasties,  which,  however,  is  not  the  case,  although  the  Baby- 
lonian chronologist  enumerates  North  Babylonian  kings  of 
Kis,  Upi  and  Agade  and  South  Babylonian  kings  of  Uruk  in 
uninterrupted  sequence.  Nor  is  it  possible  to  place  the  two 
kingdoms  in  the  period  of  159  years  of  the  rule  of  Gutium; 
for  if  En-sakus-anna  and  Enbi-Istar  who  together  ruled  over 
the  whole  of  Babylonia,  had  reigned  at  that  time,  the  chronologist 
would  certainly  have  broken  the  time  of  the  foreign  rule 
in  two  periods  and  inserted  the  native  dynasties  of  KiS  and 
Uruk  somewhere  between  the  first  and  second  rule  of  Gutium. 
There  remains  therefore  no  other  possibility  than  to  place 
En-sakus-anna  and  Enbi-Istar  either  before  the  kingdom  of 
Upi  or  more  than  612  years  later  after  Utu-hegal,  the  liberator 
of  Babylonia  from  the  yoke  of  Gutium.  Palaeographical  evi- 
dence, however, .  shows  clearly  that  only  the  first  possibility 
can  seriously  be  taken  into  account,  since  the  script  of  En- 
jakus-anna's  inscriptions  in  some  particulars  is  more  archaic 
than  that  of  the  inscriptions  of  Lugal-zaggisi.  The  sign  for 
bi  in  En-sakus-anna's  inscriptions,  e.  g.,  has  the  forms  cm^> 
and  nrT^>,  /.  e.,  with  the  additional  slanting  stroke  or  tri- 
angle which  represents  the  handle(?)  of  the  jug  originally 
depicted  by  the  sign,  cf.  OBI  1059;  no3.4.5.  In  the  inscriptions 
of  Lugal-zaggisi,  those  of  the  kings  of  Agade,  as  well  as  any  later 


156  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

inscription,  on  the  other  hand,  the  sign  always  appears  in  the 
simplified  form  tmfl>  .  In  OBI  102,  though  not  in  the  other 
inscriptions  of  En-sakus-anna,  the  inner  strokes  of  the  sign 
ki  are  spreading  in  somewhat  the  fashion  of  a  fan,  which  is 
never  observed  in  the  inscriptions  of  Lugal-zaggisi.  It  is  quite 
inconceivable  that  these  features  should  have  to  be  attributed 
to  intentional  archaisms,  for  the  rough  engravings  on  the  vases 
of  En-sakus-anna  do  not  suggest  the  slightest  intention  of  the 
scribe  to  deviate  from  the  then  current  way  of  drawing  the 
signs.  Thus  we  have  to  place  En-sakus-anna  and  Enbi-Istar 
before  the  dynasty  of  Upi,  .i.  e.,  somewhat  more  than  two 
hundred  years  before  Lugal-zaggisi.  This  result,  moreover, 
explains  very  satisfactorily  the  fact  that  in  our  inscriptions 
Kis  and  Upi  are  the  most  important  cities  of  Northern  Baby- 
lonia; for  the  first  two  dynasties  of  the  period  for  which  the 
sequence  of  the  kings  is  again  known,  show  Babylonia  under 
kings  of  these  two  cities. 

Assuming  that  En-sakus-anna  succeeded  at  least  in  assum- 
ing the  leadership  of  Babylonia  after  his  success  over  Kis,  we 
should  have  to  assume  the  following  succession  of  Babylonian 
kingdoms : 

Second  (?)  kingdom  of  Ki3. 


Enbi-Istar 

Second  (?)  kingdom  of  Uruk  (?) 
Ensakusanna 


Kingdom  of  Upi. 


V 
THE  EVENTS  OF  EANNADU'S  REIGN 


THE  EVENTS  OF  EANNADU'S  REIGN 


The  value  of  the  historical  material  to  be  derived  from  the 
inscriptions  of  Eannadu,  isakku  of  LagaS,  has  been  consider- 
ably underestimated  because  of  the  assumption  that  the  events 
mentioned  in  them  are  not  enumerated  in  their  historical 
sequence.  King,1  e.  g.,  although  for  no  obvious  reason,  assumes 
that  the  enumeration  was  made  on  a  rough  geographical  scale 
and  consequently  feels  at  liberty  to  contract  several  chrono- 
logically separated  events  into  one,  while  Eduard  Meyer,2 
though  assuming  a  chronological  order  for  the  first  part  of  the 
enumeration,  nevertheless  sees  only  a  resume  of  previously 
mentioned  events  in  the  second  half  of  the  account  in  the  in- 
scriptions. Against  these  assumptions  it  must  be  said  that 
in  none  of  the  older  Babylonian  inscriptions  can  a  parallel 
for  these  alleged  repetitions  be  found  and  that  therefore  such 
a  repetition  in  our  case  is  by  no  means  likely.  Note  also  that 
the  account,  although  in  all  cases  that  we  can  control  beginning 
with  the  same  events,  is  not  carried  on  to  the  same  point  in  all 
inscriptions,  a  fact  which  finds  a  satisfactory  explanation  only 
in  the  assumption  that  at  the  time  when  these  inscriptions  were 
written  the  additional  events  related  in  other  inscriptions 
had  not  yet  taken  place  and  therefore  could  not  be  recorded. 
But  the  best  proof  for  the  chronological  order  will  be  found  in 
the  internal  congruity  of  the  following  outline  of  Eannadu's 
career. 

As  the  first  events  of  Eannadu's  reign  three  peaceful  works 
are  recorded,  namely,  the  restoration  of  the  city  of  Girsu,  the 
construction  of  the  wall  of  Uru-azag,  and  the  building,  or 

1  HSA,  p.  147  ff. 

1  Die  Kriege  Eannatums  von  Lagai,  SbKPAW  1912,  p.  1094. 

(159) 


160  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

possibly  the  rebuilding,  of  the  city  of  Nina.1  From  this  fact 
it  is  evident  that  Girsu  had  previously  been  destroyed,  which 
event,  for  aught  we  know  at  present,  probably  took  place  dur- 
ing the  reign  of  Eannadu's  father  Akurgal;  for  Akurgal,  though 
Eannadu  calls  him  king  in  one  passage,  is  elsewhere  given 
only  the  title  isakku,  which  means  that,  at  least  in  the  later 
part  of  his  reign,  he  no  longer  laid  claim  to  the  title  of  king 
which  his  father  Ur-Nina  had  borne.  This  loss  of  the  royal 
title,  no  doubt,  was  the  consequence  of  some  political  disaster, 
and  it  may  very  well  be  that  Girsu  was  destroyed  when  this 
took  place;  whether  Uru-azag,  "the  holy  city,"  and  the  city 
of  Nina  had  been  destroyed  at  the  same  time,  we  have  no 
means  of  knowing.  We  see  clearly  that  the  young  isakku 
tries  to  strengthen  his  political  power  by  erecting  strong  forti- 
fications. The  three  works  are  recorded  in  all  inscriptions 
that  treat  of  this  first  period  of  Eannadu's  reign,  except  in 
Brick  A,  where  the  construction  of  the  wall  of  Uru-azag  is 
omitted,  evidently  through  an  oversight. 

After  the  preparatory  works  just  mentioned,  the  comple- 
tion of  which,  of  course,  must  have  required  several  years, 
Eannadu  embarks  on  a  series  of  daring  military  enterprises, 
which  in  the  inscriptions  are  enumerated  in  the  following 
sequence:  (i)  war  with  the  mountain  country  of  Elam  to  the 
east  of  Lagas;  (2)  war  with  the  isakku  of  the  unknown  city  of 
URU  +  A;  (3)  war  with  the  neighboring  isakku  of  Umma, 
north  of  Lagas;  (4  and  5)  war  with  Uruk  and  Ur  in  the  west; 
(6)  war  with  Ki-babbar;  (7-9)  war  with  the  otherwise  unknown 
cities  of  Uru-az,  Me5/me  and  A-RU-a.2 

In  all  these  conflicts  with  his  neighbors  Eannadu  was 
victorious;  but  with  the  exception  of  the  war  with  Umma, 
we  know  nothing  of  the  causes  that  led  to  them,  and  only  a 
few  scanty  details  as  to  the  final  outcome,  at  least  in  so  far  as 
this  was  favorable  to  Eannadu.  As  regards  the  first  and  second 
enterprises,  for  example,  the  inscriptions  refer  only  to  a  battle 

1  Foundation-stone  A  36.11- 
1  Foundation-stone  A  312-411. 


A.    POEBEL — THE   EVENTS  OF   EANNADU's  REIGN  161 

in  the  high  mountains  of  Elam  and  a  battle  over  against 
URU-f  A,  in  which  the  iSakku  of  the  hostile  city  himself  fought 
at  the  head  of  his  troops;  after  either  victory  Eannadu  tri- 
umphantly piled  up  a  mound  of  slain  enemies. 

As  regards  the  war  with  Umma,  the  third  enterprise,  we 
are  considerably  better  informed,  since  it  is  referred  to  some- 
what more  at  length  on  the  stele  commemorating  the  subse- 
quent treaty  with  Umma,1  and  likewise  is  mentioned  in  a  very 
important  historical  review  at  the  beginning  of  an  inscription 
of  Entemena,  Eannadu's  nephew.2  According  to  the  latter 
the  isakku  Us  of  Umma  had  invaded  the  territory  of  LagaS 
and,  as  we  must  infer,  had  especially  appropriated  the  so-called 
Gu-edin  of  Ningirsu,  a  territory  the  tithes  of  which  evidently 
belonged  to  the  temple  of  this  god.  The  inscription  does  not 
state  whether  this  event,  as  is  generally  assumed,  took  place 
at  the  time  of  Eannadu  immediately  before  his  own  attack 
on  Umma,  or  whether  it  had  taken  place  before  he  began  to 
rule  over  Lagas;  the  latter,  however,  was  evidently  the  case, 
since  the  statement  that  Eannadu  restored  the  Guedin  to 
Ningirsu,  indicates  that  this  territory  had  been  in  the  hands 
of  Umma  for  some  time.  It  is  by  no  means  impossible,  that 
the  territory  was  seized  by  the  Ummites  at  the  time  of  the 
calamity  during  the  reign  of  A-kurgal,  of  which  we  have  spoken 
before;  for  in  the  damaged  second  column  of  the  stele  of  vultures, 
which  evidently  deals  with  the  previous  conflicts  between  Lagas 
and  Umma,  A-kurgal  is  mentioned  immediately  after  the 
people  of  Umma,  which  shows  that  this  isakku  was  engaged 
in  a  feud  with  them.  A  longer  occupation  of  the  territory- 
is  also  made  likely  by  the  complaint  in  the  sixth  column  of 
the  stele  that  the  isakku  of  Umma  together  with  the  people 
of  Umma(?)  "eats"  the  Guedin,  the  beloved  field  of  Ningirsu, 
i.  e.,  that  he  enjoys  the  usufruct  of  the  fields.  Moreover,  this 
assumption  would  easily  explain  why  the  inscriptions  mention 
Enakalli  as  isakku  of  Umma,  contemporary  with  Eannadu. 

1  Stele  of  Vultures. 

2  Clay  cone  of  Entemena. 


162  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

without  alluding  to  the  supposed  replacement  of  Us  by  this 
isakku.  It  seems  that  after  his  success  in  Elam  Eannadu  con- 
sidered the  time  ripe  for  again  taking  possession  of  the  lost 
territory.  On  the  strength  of  an  oracle  or  some  other  sign  from 
Enlil,  by  which  Ningirsu  was  ordered  to  fight  against  Umma,1 
Eannadu  invaded  the  territory  of  this  city  and  in  a  pitched 
battle  routed  its  forces.  Umma  itself  was  stormed  and  Eannadu, 
to  use  his  own  words,  raged  in  its  midst  like  the  deluge  demon. 
How  fierce  the  fighting  in  the  battle  must  have  been,  may 
easily  be  judged  from  Eannadu's  boast  that  he  piled  up  twenty 
mounds  of  slain.  Enakalli  of  Umma  then  submitted  to  a  treaty 
by  which  the  old  frontier,  which'seems  to  have  been  much  nearer 
to  Umma  than  to  Lagas,  was  restored,  and  Enakalli  himself 
became,  if  not  in  name,  at  least  in  fact,  the  vassal  of  Lagas. 

The  fourth  and  fifth  enterprises,  the  war  or  wars  with  Uruk 
and  Ur,  show  that  Eannadu  at  once  followed  up  his  decisive 
victory  over  Umma  by  attacking  the  western  part  of  Southern 
Babylonia.  The  inscriptions  merely  state  that  he  vanquished 
the  two  cities  in  two  separate  battles,  the  first  of  which  was 
fought  with  the  Urukites,  the  other  with  the  people  of  Ur; 
but  from  the  similar  laconic  description  of  his  victory  over 
Umma  we  must  infer  that  he  took  possession  of  the  two  cities 
themselves,  treating  them,  no  doubt,  in  a  smilar  manner  as 
the  city  of  Umma,  and  so  evidently  also  the  city  of  Ki-babbar, 
which  he  defeated  in  a  third  battle.2  As  in  some  of  the  inscrip- 

1  See  Babyloniaca  IV  p.  206. 

2  The  city  of  ki-dbabbar,  foundation-stone  A  Col.  410,  ki-babbar-k[a],  B  Col.  414,  is  perhaps, 
as  Dhorme  has  pointed  out  in  OLZ  No.  8  Col.  34,  identical  with  the  city  of  ki-bal-bar-rukl,  2  R 
60,  i  Col.  is&,  ki-bal-bar-rukl,  4  R  36(38]  3  Col.  2i6;   under  the  latter  form  the  city  is  mentioned 
in  the  date  formula  of  the  4th  year  of  Sumu-abum:   mu  bad  ki-bal-bar-rukl  ba-du  =  "year  after 
the  wall  of  Kibalbarru  was  built,"  as  well  as  in  the  date  of  the  iyth  year  of  Hammu-rabi:   mu 

ha-am-mu-ra-bi   lugal-e  alam-dinnanna-ki-bal-bar-rukl   sag-an-Su-mu-un-il?- =   "year   in 

which  King  Hammu-rabi,  after  having  made  high  as  Heaven  an  image  of  Innanna  of  Kibalbarru, 

"     Since  Hammu-rabi's  rule  in   his   i6th  and    iyth  year,  so  far  as  we  know,  reached 

only  to  some  point  between  Ki<>   and  Nippur,  and  since,  on   the  other  hand,  Eannadu   would 
naturally  first  have  to  encounter  the  resistance  of  a  North-Babylonian  city  near  the  dividing 
line  between  North  and   South,  we   may  conclude   that   Kibabbar  was   situated  in  the  south- 
ernmost part  of  Northern  Babylonia.      Ki-babbar  was  an  important  city  at  the  time  of  the 
dynasty  of  Agade,  standing  under  its  own  iSakku;  cf.  4zu-zu  5dumu  ur-amar-da6  DUMU-DUMV 
i-ki-lum  7ISAG  8ki-babbarkl,  Manistusu,  Obelisk,  C,  Col.  2. 


A.    POEBEL— THE    EVENTS  OF   EANNADl/S   REIGN  163 

lions  the  battles  with  Ur  and  Ki-habbar  are  omitted,  we  may 
suppose  that  the  one  fought  with  Uruk  was  the  most  important, 
all  three  battles  perhaps  occurring  in  the  same  campaign.1 

The  cities  of  Uruaz,  Mi&'me  and  Arwa,  against  which  the 
seventh,  eighth  and  ninth  enterprises  were  directed  and  which, 
no  doubt,  were  situated  outside  of  Babylonia,  however,  were 
treated  more  severely.  The  first  two  were  sacked  and  the 
isakku  of  Uruaz  was  killed,  while  the  city  of  Arwa  was  com- 
pletely destroyed. 

How  long  a  period  we  have  to  assume  for  these  successful 
enterprises  of  Eannadu,  we  are  not  able  to  say;  only  this  seems 
to  be  certain  that  they  extended  over  several  years.  There 
is,  e.  g.,  hardly  any  doubt  that  the  invasion  of  Elam,  the  attack 
upon  Umma,  the  occupation  of  Uruk  and  Ur,  and  the  raid 
into  the  foreign  countries  belong,  each  of  them,  to  a  separate 
year,  so  that  we  may  assume  a  period  of  at  least  four  or  five 
years. 

The  enterprises  of  which  we  have  spoken  form  a  well- 
defined  section  in  the  inscriptions,  comprising  the  lines  312-419 
on  foundation-stone  A  and  marked  as  an  independent  section 
by  placing  the  name  of  Eannadu  at  its  beginning.  It  treats 
of  those  events  by  which  Lagas  became  the  leading  power  in 
Southern  Babylonia;  and  indeed,  the  stele  of  vultures  evidently 
had  a  remark  to  that  effect  at  the  end  of  the  corresponding 

section,  for  the  words  su-e   ki-en-gi,  " Sumer,"  Rev.  83,4, 

no  doubt  stated  that  Eannadu  at  that  time  exerciseB  hegemony 
over  Southern  Babylonia. 

With  the  new  section,  420ff,  we  enter  upon  the  period  of 
Eannadu's  greatest  successes.  While  up  to  this  time  his  achieve- 
ments were  restricted  to  Elam  and  Southern  Babylonia,  we 
see  him  now  engaged  in  a  conflict  with  the  North  then  forming 
the  kingdom  of  Upi.  The  city  of  Upi,  the  later  Opis,  was 
situated  on  the  Tigris  in  the  northernmost  part  of  Babylonia, 
from  which  we  may  probably  conclude  that  the  boundaries 
of  the  kingdom  of  Upi  stretched  much  farther  north  into  the 

1  Note,  however,  that  Brick  B  Col.  2i0.n  mentions  only  the  defeat  of  Ur. 


164  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

territory  of  Assyria.  The  inscriptions  of  Eannadu  themselves 
indicate  the  broadening  of  his  sphere  of  action  by  the  intro- 
ductory statement  that  all  the  foreign  lands1  engaged  in  war 
with  him.2  This  passage  is  of  special  interest  since  it  shows 
that  at  the  time  of  Eannadu,  at  least  from  the  Sumerian  stand- 
point, Northern  Babylonia  clearly  was  included  in  the  term 
kur-kur,  for  in  the  immediate  continuation  the  inscription 
speaks  exclusively  of  the  king  of  Dpi.  We  have  in  this  another 
proof  that  Northern  Babylonia  was  then  as  at  other  times 
inhabited  or  at  least  dominated  by  a  different  race,  namely, 
the  Semites,  although,  of  course,  of  itself  it  would  not  be  impos- 
sible that  Northern  Babylonia  had  then  fallen  into  the  hands 
of  a  non-Semitic  people. 

In  the  inscription  on  Brick  B  the  statement  referring  to 
the  foreign  land  precedes  the  account  of  the  destruction  of 
the  city  of  Arua  with  which  the  inscription  closes.  This  is, 
however,  by  no  means  remarkable,  since  Arua  probably  is  a 
foreign  city,  and  as  such  its  destruction  could  very  well  be 
related  in  the  new  section  of  the  narrative.  This  oscillation  in 
the  dividing  up  of  the  various  sections,  moreover,  may  even 
indicate  that  the  north-Babylonian  war  now  beginning  was 
a  continuation  of  the  previous  wars,  or  rather  developed  out 
of  them.  Apparently  the  king  of  Dpi  feared  the  constant 

1  Kur-kur-ri;  kur,  "foreign  land,"  is  perhaps  of  the  same  origin  as  the  word  kur  "foreign," 
"different,"  "strange,"  "hostile,"  and  originally  meant  simply  "die  Fremde."     As  the  Sumerians 
dwelt  in  the  plain  and  the  hostile  foreigners  chiefly  came  from  the  Zagros  range  and  the  moun- 
tains in  Kurdistan,  etc.,  it  seems  that  later  on  the  idea  of  "mountain"  also  became  associated 
with  the  term  kur. 

2  Thureau-Dangin   translates   the   phrase   e-an-na-du.  .  .  .da   kur-kur-ri   sag-e-da-slg   "von 
Eannadu.  .  .  wurde  den  Landern  der  Kopf  zerschmettert;"   but  as  I  have  pointed  out  on  various 
occasions,  the  combination  e-da-lal  has  active  force;  the  active  subject  of  the  sentence,  more- 
over, is  clearly  kur-kur-ri,  denoted  as  such  by  the  subject-e. 

The  construction  with  da  and  the  context  show  that  the  phrase  X-da  sag — da-slg  expresses 
an  idea  like  "to  fight  with  somebody,"  corresponding  to  the  phrases  X-da  dam-ha-ra — da-(s)3, 
X-da  ei§tukul — da-sig.  As  ^tukul — sig  means  "to  smite  with  one's  weapons,"  sag — sig  might 
mean  literally  "to  smite  with  one's  head,"  i.  e.,  to  gore  like  a  bull  with  his  horns;  X-da  sag — 
da-slg,  corresponding  to  X-da  gi§tukul — da-slg,  then  would  be  "to  fight  with  somebody  with 
one's  horns  (like  a  bull);"  but  whether  this  is  the  right  explanation,  our  material  does  not  allow  us 
definitely  to  decide  at  the  present  time.  In  some  of  the  passages  where  the  word  occurs  a  mean- 
ing "to  revolt"  would  fit  very  well. 


A.    POEBEL — THE   EVENTS  OF   EANNADU's   REJGN  165 

growth  of  the  power  of  the  southern  iSakku,  and  as  soon  as 
Eannadu  began  to  direct  his  attentions  beyond  the  boundaries 
of  Southern  Babylonia,  he  attacked  him.  For  aught  we  know, 
Eannudu  himself  had  up  to  that  time  been  the  aggressor  in  his 
various  martial  enterprises;  that  now,  however,  the  situation 
changed,  is  clearly  indicated  by  the  different  wording  of  the 
introductory  phrase;  for  the  latter  does  no  longer  state  that 
Eannadu  waged  war  with  the  foreign  lands,  but  on  the  contrary 
asserts  that  the  foreign  countries  make  war  on  Eannadu.1  In 
fact,  the  inscription  presently  tells  us  that  Zuzu,  king  of  Dpi, 
invades  the  territory  of  Lagas,  advancing  as  far  as  the  Antasurra 
of  Ningirsu,  a  certain  territory  somewhere  in  the  vicinity  of 
Lagas,  probably  to  the  north,  belonging,  like  the  Gu-edin,  to 
the  temple  of  Ningirsu.  But  Eannadu  promptly  routed  the 
king  of  Upi  and  with  continual  slaughter  pursued  him  to  his 
very  capital,  so  that  almost  none  of  Zuzu's  army  was  saved 
when  he  arrived  there.2  Upi  itself  was  perhaps  not  conquered, 
but  Northern  Babylonia  south  of  the  territory  of  Upi  proper, 
and  especially  the  important  city  of  Kis,  fell  into  Eannadu's 
hands. 

The  isakku  is  now  at  the  acme  of  his  career.  Now  is  the 
time  when  the  stele  of  vultures  was  dedicated,  and  it  will  be 
observed  that  Eannadu  in  the  inscription  on  this  monument 
has  changed  his  title  to  "king  of  Lagas."3  It  is  probably  only 
a  short  time  later  that,  as  we  learn  from  the  inscription  on 
foundation-stone  A,  the  priests  of  Innanna  at  Kis^  or  if  we 
adopt  the  phrasing  of  the  Babylonian  theologians,  the  Goddess 
Innanna  herself,  proclaimed  him  king  of  Kis,4  a  title  much 
prouder  than  "king  of  LagasY'  since  in  the  earliest  legendary 
times  of  Babylonian  history  it  had  stood  for  dominion  over 
the  whole  world. 


1  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  420.24-     See  the  preceding  note. 

2  Cf.  52-8 :   "From  the  antasurra  of  Ningirsu  he  slew  and  annihilated  the  king  of  L'pi  as  far 
as  Upi."     This  does  not,  of  course,  mean  that  Zuzu  himself  was  slain,  which  undoubtedly  would 
have  been  expressed  by  zu-zu.  .  .  mu-u$,  the  phrase  used,  e.  g.,  414  of  the  isakku  of  Uru-az. 

3  Stele  of  Vultures,  Rev.  542. 

4  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  520-65. 


165  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

It  seems  that  after  the  complete  defeat  of  Zuzu  and  the 
extension  of  Eannadu's  power  to  the  north  a  short  period  of 
peace  began  for  Babylonia,  since  Eannadu  then  commenced 
to  dig  a  new  canal  to  Lagas,  which  he  called  after  his  own  name 
Lum-ma-dim-sar,  that  is,  "prosperous (?)  like  Lumma;"1  for, 
as  the  passage  expressly  states,  the  isakku  had  a  second  name 
besides  Eannadu,  namely,  Lumma,  which  perhaps  means  "the 
prosperous  one."2 

But  before  the  canal  was  finished — only  the  excavating 
had  been  done  and  it  still  remained  to  line  its  walls  with  bricks— 
Eannadu  was  again  drawn  into  the  vortex  of  warfare.  The 
Elamites  began  hostilities  by  invading  Southern  Babylonia. 
Eannadu  drove  them  back  to  their  country,  according  to  his 
statement,3  but  as  he  fails  to  make  any  further  comment  on 
this  success,  it  is  evident  that  at  any  rate  he  was  not  able  to 
follow  up  his  success  by  an  invasion  of  Elam  itself;  for  in  the 
meanwhile  Kis  in  Northern  Babylonia  had  revolted  and  even 
taken  the  offensive  against  Eannadu.  As  the  immediate  con- 
tinuation speaks  only  of  the  king  of  Upi  as  the  adversary  of 
Eannadu,  this  king  must  have  been  the  soul  of  the  attack, 
but  the  extreme  brevity  of  the  narration  does  not  allow  us 
to  say  whether  then  he  himself  had  again  taken  possession 
of  Kis  or  whether  an  independent  king  had  established  himself 

1  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  59.19. 

2  The  passage  from  59-19,  the  meaning  of  which  has  not  been  heretofore  understood,  must  be 
translated:   "At  that  time  he  dug  a  new  canal  for  Ningirsu  and  called  its  name  Lumma-dim-sar 
after  Lumma,  the  GlR-GlR  name  of  Eannadu,  Eannadu  being  his  U-RUM  name." 

Is  GlR-GlR  perhaps  Tidnum?  In  this  case  we  should  have  to  suppose  that  the  family 
of  Eannadu  had  immigrated  into  Babylonia  from  the  West.  A  satisfactory  explanation  for 
U-RUM,  however,  cannot  yet  be  offered. 

Grammatically  the  passage  is  very  interesting  on  account  of  a  ccmplicated  anticipatory 

construction.  The  complex  e-an-na-du-ma lum-ma-a  510-11  belongs  to  the  sentence 

mu  mu-na-sa  519,  but  is  placed  before  the  sentence  dnin-gir-su-ra  a-gibil  mu-na-dun,  the  conse- 
quence of  which  is  that  the  latter  sentence  now  forms  only  a  kind  of  parenthesis.  Within  the 
anticipated  group  e-an-na-du-ma.  ..  .lum-ma-a  the  first  word  e-an-na-du-ma  again  represents 
an  anticipated  genitive  which  is  later  taken  up  by  the  possessive  pronoun  ni;  literally,  there- 
fore, the  passage  runs  "of  Eannadu  his  U-RUM -name,"  etc.,  that  is,  "the  U-RUM  name  of 
Eannadu."  See  the  rules  for  this  construction  in  my  paper:  Die  Genetivkonstruction  im 
Sumerischen,  Babyloniaca  IV,  p.  203,  No.  5. 

3  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  66-8. 


A.    POEBEL— THE   EVENTS  OF   EANNADU's   REIGN  167 

in  this  city.1  The  text  only  states  that  Eannadu  drove  the 
king  of  Upi  back  to  his  land.2 

This  rather  modest  statement,  which  makes  no  mention 
of  a  pitched  battle,  as  well  as  the  similar  statement  concerning 
the  preceding  repulsion  of  the  Elamites  must  perhaps  be  taken 
as  an  indication  that  Eannadu  himself  was  entirely  kept  on 
the  defensive,  the  Elamites  and  the  Northerners  perhaps  re- 
treating only  temporarily,  in  order  to  collect  new  forces;  in 
fact,  the  following  group  of  events,  which  begins  with  6i2,  shows 
us  Eannadu  again  attacked  in  his  own  territory  from  the  east 
as  well  as  from  the  north,  and  in  both  cases  the  foes  are  re- 
enforced  by  new  allies.  Together  with  the  Elamites  we  find 
the  people  of  the  cities  of  Subur(?)  and  of  URU  +  A  arrayed 
against  him,  whereas  Kis  and  Upi  are  allied  with  the  kingdom 
of  Mari.  The  fact  that  this  comparatively  remote  state  assists 
the  adversaries  of  Eannadu,  however,  is  a  clear  indication  of 
the  strong  position  held  by  the  ruler  of  Lagas  and  of  the  fear 
of  the  allies  that  he  might  again  succeed  in  forcing  his  supremacy 
on  Babylonia.  Kis  and  Upi  here  appear  clearly  as  two  different 
states,  the  former  constituting,  in  this  period  at  least,  a  kingdom 
independent  of  Upi. 

This  time  Eannadu  defeated  the  aggressors  in  two  pitched 
battles;  that  against  the  Easterners  was  fought  at  a  place 
called  the  Suhur-water  or  the  Suhur-canal,  which  probably 
was  situated  to  the  east  of  Lagas;  the  battle  against  the 
Northerners  took  place  again,  as  on  the  previous  occasion,  in 
the  Antasurra  of  Ningirsu.3  These  victories  were  decisive  and 
secured  Eannadu,  at  least  for  some  time,  against  further  attacks 
from  the  east  as  well  as  from  the  north,  as  may  be  concluded 
from  Eannadu's  renewed  building  activity.  It  will  be  noted 

1  But  note  that  in  Col.  12  of  the  reverse  of  the  stele  of  vultures  the  words  lugfal]  ki[5(i)J 
*['](?)  occur.     The  king  of  KiS  mentioned   here,  is  of  course  not  identical  with  the  king  of  L'pi. 
who  is  mentioned  in  foundation-stone  A  610.     Whether  the  sign  al  in  the  preceding  panel  begins 
the  name  of  the  king,  is  entirely  uncertain ;  nor  is  it  very  likely  that  Col.  12  represents  the  cartotube 
of  the  king  of  KiS,  Col.  12  evidently  belonging  together  with  Cols,  loand  n. 

2  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  610,  n. 

3  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  612.72. 


VOL.  IV. 


168  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

that  in  the  introductory  phrase  of  the  section  treating  of  these 
successes  Eannadu  proudly  calls  himself,  with  reference  to  his 
victories,  "Ningirsu's  humiliator  of  the  foreign  lands;"  never- 
theless, his  power  was  now  considerably  restricted,  as  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  he  again  has  to  content  himself  with  the 
modest  title  "isakku  of  Lagas,"  and  although  there  is  no  reason 
why  we  should  not  assume  that  he  was  still  the  most  powerful 
dynast  of  Southern  Babylonia,  yet  there  seems  to  have  been 
established  a  kind  of  political  equilibrium  which  secured  the 
peace  for  some  time. 

Immediately  after  the  battle  with  the  northern  confederates 
Eannadu  finished  the  canal  begun  before  the  last  wars,  lining 
its  walls  with  bricks  and  solemnly  dedicating  it  to  Ningirsu.1 
Some  time  later2  he  built  a  huge  basin  fed  by  this  canal  and 
having  a  capacity  of  3600  kor  of  water,  as  he  expressly  states:3 
Still  later4  he  built  the  "tiras-palace"  and  dedicated  it  to  his 
tutelary  god  DUN-X.6 

This  is  the  last  we  know  of  the  achievements  of  Eannadu. 
His  successor  was  not  a  son,  but  a  brother  of  his,  Enannadu.6 
We  do  not  know  the  reason  for  this  break  in  the  succession, 
but  similar  cases  seem  to  suggest  that  the  warlike  isakku  became 
the  victim  of  a  final  catastrophe,  which  placed  his  brother  upon 
the  throne  and,  at  the  same  time,  ushered  in  a  period  of  political 
weakness  for  Lagas,  from  which  it  again  arose  only  under  Ente- 
mena,  the  son  of  Enannadu. 

As  we  see  from  this  sketch  of  his  career,  Eannadu  played 
a  very  important  part  in  the  history  of  Babylonia  during  this 
period.  The  fact  that  he  occupied,  though  only  for  a  short 
time,  the  throne  of  Kis,  doubtless  gave  him  a  place  in  the  list 
of  kings,  and  it  is  therefore  of  great  importance  to  determine 

1  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  73^. 

2  Indicated  by  the  fact  that  the  following  statement  forms  a  new  section  beginning  with 
Eannadu's  name. 

3  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  77.13. 

4  Again  indicated  by  Eannadu's  name  at  the  beginning  of  the  sentence 
6  Foundation-stone  A  Col.  714-20- 

6  We  do  not  know,  however,  whether  Enannadu  was  the  immediate  successor  of  Eannadu. 


A.    POEBEL — THE    EVENTS  OF   EANNADU's   REIGN  169 

his  chronological  relation  to  the  dynasties  known  to  us  from 
the  recovered  portions  of  the  list.  As  the  script  of  his  and  his 
successors'  inscriptions  leaves  no  doubt  that  Eannadu  and  his 
successors  preceded  Lugal-zaggisi,  we  have  to  place  them  before 
the  dynasties  of  Dpi  and  Kis  known  from  Scheil's  list,  since 
neither  Eannadu  as  king  of  KiS  nor  his  contemporary  Zuzu 
of  Upi  is  enumerated  among  the  rulers  of  Upi  and  KiS.  The 
fact  that  up  to  the  present  time  only  seven  iSakkus  between 
Eannadu  and  Lugal-zaggisi  are  known  from  Telloh  tablets,1  can- 
not, of  course,  be  cited  as  a  proof  against  this  conclusion,  since 
the  excavations  may  at  any  time  result  in  the  discovery  of  the 
now  missing  isakkus,  quite  apart  from  the  possibility  that 
Lagas  may  not  have  been  inhabited  for  some  time. 

The  sequence  of  old  Babylonian  rulers,  as  far  as  it  can  be 
ascertained  from  our  inscriptions,  is  therefore  the  following: 

Mesilim,  king  of  Kis 

At  least  several  generations;    among  other  rulers  perhaps 
Enbi-Is'tar,  king  of  Kis. 
En-Sakus-anna,  king  of  Uruk? 


Zuzu,  king  of  Upi. 
Eannadu,  king  of  Kis. 

Second  (?)  kingdom  of  Upi. 
Fourth  (?)  kingdom  of  Ki§ 


1  Thureau-Dangin  counts  ten  reigns  from  Ur  Nina  to  Uru-kagina,  RA  IX,  p.  37.  note  4. 


VI 
INSCRIPTIONS  OF  KINGS  OF  AGADE 


INSCRIPTIONS  OF  KINGS  OF  AGADE 


TRANSCRIPTION  AND  TRANSLATION 

No.  34 
A.  AND  B.  INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN  IN  SUMERIAN  AND  AKKADIAN 


Col.  i. 

a.       [sar-um1-GI(  =  kin)j 
[lugal] 
[ag-gi-dekl] 
[maskim?] 

5  [dinnanna]  5 

[lu]gal  [kis(i)] 
[pas]is-an-na. 
lugal 

kalam-ma 

10  isa(g)-gal  10 

den-lil 
uru  unu1 
e-hul 
bad-bi 


Id 


Col.  2. 

[sar-rum-GI(  = 

[sar] 

[a-ga-de"] 

[MASKIM-GI]2 

[  innanna] 

[sar  kis(i)] 

[pa-sis  AN(  =  anim) 

[V  N        1 
sar] 

KALAM-MAki(  =  matim) 

ISAG(  =  isak) 

den-lil 

URUki(  =  al)  |  urukki 

SAG-GlS-RA(  =  inar) 


15  u     BAD(  =  dur)-su 


15  e-ga-. .  . 

lu-unukl-ga-|da 

gistukul 

e-da-slg 
20  tun-KAR  20 


(N)I-GUL-GUL 

in  KAS-x(  =  tahazi) 
urukki 

LAM  +  KUR-ar(  =  isar) 


Sarru-kin, 

king 

of  Agade, 

vicegerent 

of  IStar, 

king  of  Kil, 

pasisu  of  Anumr 

king 

of  the  land, 

great  isakku 

of  Enlil: 

the  city  of  Uruk 

he  smote 

and  its  wall 

he  destroyed. 

With  the  people  of  Uruk 

he 

battled3 

and  he 


1  See  footnote  to  325. 

2  See  inscription  h. 

3  Akkadian  text:   in  a  battle  he  vanquished  Uruk,  or  perhaps  better:   in  the  battle  with 
Uruk  he  gained  the  victory. 

(173) 


174 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


lug[al-zag-|gi-si] 
[lugal] 


25 


[e-da-sig] 

e-ga-KU 

glSsi-gar-ta 
30  ka-den-lil-|la-su 

e[-t]um 

[sar-um5-GI(  =  kin)] 

lugal 
35  [a]g-gi-dejki 

lu-urikl-  ma-da 
40  gl5tukul  |  e-da-slg 

tun-KAR  |  e-ni-si 

uru-ni 

e-ga-  ---- 

45  u 
bad-bi 

e-ga-.[.  .  .] 

e-dnin-markl 

e-hul 
50  bad-bi 

e-ga-[..].[.] 

gu-kalam-bi 

SlR-BUR-LAki-ta 
55  a-ab-ba-su-na-|NE 

e-hul 


lugal-zag-|gi-si 
sar 

urukki 
25  in  KAS-x  (  =  tahazi) 

SU-DO-A(=qatsuiqsud)1 
in  SI-GAR  NE-RU3 
a-na  KA(  =  babi)  den-lil 
u-ru-u[s]4 
30  [s]ar-ru-GI(  =  kin) 

v  \ 

sar 

a-ga-dek 

in  KAS-x 

uriki 
35  LAM  +  KUR-ar 

u   URUki(  =  alam) 

SAG-GIS-RA  (  =  inar) 

u 
40  dur-su 

(N)I-GUL-GUL 

e-nin-markl 

SAG-GIS-RA 
45  u    dur-su 

(N)I-GUL-GUL 

u    KALAM-MAki-|su 
50  U7   la-BUR-S!R-riki 

a-ti-ma    ti-a-am-tim 
55  SAG-GIS-RA 


routed  them. 

With  Lugal-zaggisi, 

king 

of  Uruk, 

he 

battled 

and  he  captured  him2 

and  in  fetters 

he  led  him 

through  the  gate  of  Enlil. 

Sarru-kin, 

king 

of  Agade, 

battled  with  the 

man  of  Ur 

and  vanquished  him; 

his  city 

he  smote6 

and 

its  wall 

he  destroyed. 

E-Ninmar 

he  smote 

and  its  wall 

he  destroyed, 

and  its  (entire)  territory, 

from  Lagas 

to  the  sea, 

he  smote. 


1  Perhaps  SU-DU-a  =  gatsu  ilqaa? 

2  Akkadian  text:  his  hand  captured  him. 

3  Perhaps  £RIM  (=  ertm)  "of  bronze?" 

4  US  has  here,  as  well  as  in  the  name  (e)ri-mu-uS,  evidently  the  value  us;  cf.  also  is  =  is 
in  ga-ti-is-su,  No.  36  Rev.(?)  Col.  319. 

8  See  footnote  to  325. 

6  The  Semitic  text  runs:    In  a  battle  he  vanquished  Ur  and  smote  the  city.. 

7  To  be  read  istum? 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  ACADE 


175 


""tukul-ni 

a-ab-ba-ka2 
60  (n)i-lah 

lu-ummaki-|[d]a] 

[gistukul]  |  [e-da-sig] 
65  [tun-kar]  |  [e-ni-si] 

[uru-ni] 

[e-ga-.  . .] 

[u] 
70  [bad-bi] 

[e-ga-.  . .] 

Col.  3. 

fi.     sar-um-GI(  =  kin) 
lugal 
kalam-ma-ra 

5  lu-erim 
nu-na-si 
a[-ab-ba-] 
igi-nim-ma-  ta 
10  a-ab-ba- 


A      V  V 

Sl-SU 


gisTUKUL(  =  kag)-gi-su' 
in  ti-a-am-  tim 
(N)I-LAH 

60  ub-meki 
[i]n  K[AS]-x 
[LAM  +  KUR-ar] 
[u]|[URUki(  =  alam)] 

65  [SAG-GIS-RA] 
[u] 

[BAD(  =  dOr)-su] 
[(N)I-GUL-GUL] 

Col.  4. 

[sar-ru-GI(  =  kin)] 
sa[r] 

KALAM-MA[ki] 
den-lil 

5  ma[-hi-ra] 
[la  i-ti-|sum] 
[ti-a-am-|dam] 
10  [a-li-dam] 

[sa-bil-dam] 


...]  t i 

Lacuna  of  about  six  lines. 
^f  r 


2O 


20'  mu- [••••] 

lu-ma[-da] 

lu- [ ] 


1 


1 


His  weapons 

he  washed 

in  the  sea. 

With  the  man  of  Umma 

he  battled 

and  he  routed  him 

and  smote 

his  city 

and 

destroyed 

its  wall. 


Unto  Sarru-kin, 
king 

of  the  land, 
Enlil 
gave 

no  foe  (sem.  adversary); 
from  the  upper 
sea 

to  the  lower 
sea, 

Enlil  subjected  (the  lands) 
to  him.3 


and  the  man  of 

and  the  man  of 

stand  (in  attendance) 


1  For  the  writing  compare  the    name  8UTUKUL(  =  kag)-ga-su-al-si-in,  "his  weapon  upon 
them  (he  has  hurled),"  Obelisk  of  ManiStusu,  A  Col.  134. 

2  The  k  proves  that  a-abba  is  a  genitive  connection;  it  probably  means  "the  water(s)  of  the 
father,"  i.e.,  of  the  primeval  begetter  of  the  world. 

3  The  Semitic  text  runs:  The  upper  sea  and  the  lower  sea  Enlil  subjected  to  him. 


176 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


25'  igi  sar-um-1 
GI(  =  kin)  - 

lugal 

kalam-ma-|ka-su 
30'  (n)i-lah-gi-  es 

sar-um-GI(  =  kin) 

lugal 

kalam-ma-ge 

kis(i)ki 
35'  ki-bi 

bi-gi 

uru-bi 

ki-gub  e-na-ba 

(na-ba)4 

40'  lu  im-sar-ra-|e 

ab-. .  .-e-a 
dutu 

suhus-a-ni 
he-ba-du 
45'  numun-na-ni 
he-ga-ri-  ri-gi 

mu-sar-ra 
ki-gal-ba 


25'  [mah-ri-is] 

sar-ru-G  I  ( =  kin) 

LUGAL(  =  sarri) 

KALAM-MAki(  =  matim) 

i-za-zu-ni 
30'  sar-ru-GI(  =  kin) 

V  V 

sar 

KALAM-MAki(  =  matim) 
kiski 

a-sa-ri-su 
35'  i-ni    u          • 

u-5^-hi-su-ni3 

sa  DUB(  =  duppam) 

su-a 
40'  u-sa-za-ku-ni 

dsamas 

SUHUS(  =  isdi)-su 

li-zu-uh 

u  SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 
45'  li-il-gu-ut 

mu-sar-ra 


before 

Sarru-kin, 

king 

of  the  land. 

Sarru-kin, 
king 

of  the  land, 
restored 

Kis  (j.  e.,  the  people  of  Kis) 
in  its  (old)  place. 
Their  city  (or  the  city) 
he  gave  to  them  as  a  dwell- 
ing place. 
Who  shall 
destroy 

this  inscription, 
may  Samas 
tear  out 
his  foundations 
and  destroy 
his  seed. 

Inscription 
on  its  base. 


1  Does  here  the  sign  um  have  a  special  value  ru?  But  compare  the  writing  Sar-u-kin  in  the 
Sumerian  inscription  on  bricks  of  Sarru-kin  of  Assyria  in  Messerschmidt,  Keilschrifttexte  aus 
Assur,  382,  and  iar-u-ti-Su,  VAT  670  (date  of  the  2gth  year  of  Ammi-ditana).  The  sign  um 
is  clear;  or  is  it  perhaps  intended  for  the  sign  urudu(  =  ru)? 

2Or  lam  (/.  e.,  a'-lam)?  The  scribe  evidently  wrote  LAM  +  KUR  or  LAM  +  KOR,  but 
it  seems  as  if  he  had  afterwards  erased  the  sign  inscribed  in  LAM. 

3  Or  u-di-rji-su-ni?     For  the  value  sa  in  Semitic  inscriptions  compare  u-sa-ri-ib,  CT  32, 
5  B.M.  98917  Obv.  Col.  aV,  beside  u-sa-ri-ib,  RA  XI,  p.  88  (Thureau-Dangin,  Inscription  of 
Libit-ili,  son  of  Naram-Sin)  Col.  I2i.    Can  we  conclude  from  this  that  the  fragment  B.M.  98917 
like  our  inscription,  belongs  in  the  earlier  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Agade?     Is  the  ni  in  u-sa-hi-su-ni 
perhaps  due  to  the  influence  of  the  following  relative  forms? 

4  Erasure. 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE  177 

7.      Sar-ru-Gl(  =  kin)  Sarru-kin, 

5i'^r  king 

KALAM-MAki  of  the  land. 

(  =  matim) 

( ) 

The  end  of  the  column  is  missing  (about  five  or  six  lines);  perhaps  the  inscription 
extended  to  Column  5. 


Col.  4  8.    lugal-zag-gi-si 

V  \ 

sar 
50  urukki 

e.    mes-£ 


[u]b-m[ef 


Lugal-zaggisi, 
the  king 
of  Erek. 

Mes-£, 
the  iSakku 
of  Umma. 


About  three  lines  at  the  end  of  Column  4  are  missing;   perhaps  there  followed 
some  more  of  these  small  inscriptions,  extending  into  Column  6. 


[ki-gal 


Slabs. 


C.  AND  D.  INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN  IN  SUMERIAN  AND  AKKADIAN 

Col.  5.  Col.  6. 

The  upper  halves  of  Columns  5  and  6  are  missing. 


[ 


kalam  igi-nim 

mu-na-si 
ma-rikl 

5'  i-ar-mu-tiki 
ib-la 


ma-dam 
a-li-dam 
i-(tin)ti-|sum 
5'  ma-ri-am 
i-ar-mu-jti-a-am10 
ib-laki 


and  he  gave  unto  him 

the  upper 

land, 

Mari, 

larmuti 

and  Ibla, 


1  Cf.   Col.    1260';     2227,  J8. 


178 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


tir- 
glSerin 

har-sag- 
i  o'  ku-ga-su 

sar-um-GI(  =  kin) 
lugal 

lu-gaba-ru 
15'  nu-mu-ni-tug 
5400  erin 

av  x     v  v 
-su-su 

igi-ni-su 
gar  (n)i-ku-e 
20'  lu  mu-sar-ra-e 
[ab-h]a-lam-e-a 
an-ni 
mu-ni 
he-ha-lam-e 

numun-na-ni 
he-til-li 


nnanna-ge 


30 


[ 


1 


i  o'  a-ti-ma 

gisTIR(  =  kisti) 

gisERIN(  =  erinni) 

u 

KUR-KUR(  =  sade) 
i5'KU(  =  kaspim) 

sar-ru-GI(  =  kin) 

sarrum 

su  den-lil 

ma-hi-ra 
20'  la  i-rtin)ti-  sum 

540o|GURUS(  =  zi 

u-mis-sum 
25'  ma-har-su 

GAR-KO(  =  akalam 
ikkalQ) 

Mu-sar-ra  alan-na 
ki-gal-bi  nu-sar 

Inscription  on  a  statue. 
Its  base  is  not  inscribed. 


as  far  as 

the  cedar 

forest 

and 

the  silver 

mountains. 

Unto  Sarru-kin, 

the  king, 

Enlil 

did  not  give 

an  adversary.1 

5400  men 

eat  daily 

food 

before  him. 

Whoever  destroys 

this  inscription, 

may  Anu 

destroy 

his  name, 

may  Enlil 

extirpate 

his  seed, 

mav  Innanna 


his 


Rest  of  inscription  is  missing. 


1  In  the  Semitic  text  the  scribe  began  in  1.  18  a  relative  clause  (Sarru-kin  to  whom  Enlil 
had  not  given  an  adversary,  etc.),  but  he  did  not  add  the  verb  in  the  relative  form.  Or  is 
SU  den-lil  =  qat  Enlil  (the  hand  of  Enlil  did  not  give)? 


A.    POEBEL—  INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  ACADE  179 

E.  INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN 

Col.  6         zam-a-ma  (For)  Zamama, 

30'  il-su  his  god: 

Sar-ru-GI(-kin)  Sarru-kin, 

Sar  king 

kis(i)  of  KiS, 

in  .........  -  in  the  ____ 

35        ki  .....  -ri?  ....... 

a-ga-deki  of  Agade, 

URUki(  =  alam)  a  city 

[  .........  ]....  be  built 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  (at  the  beginning  of  Column  7)  is  missing. 

F.  INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN 
The  beginning  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 


Col.  7         [u]  and 

gisTU[KUL(  =  kag)-gi-su]  he  washed 

in  [ti-a-am-|tim]  his  weapons 

(N)I-LAH  in  the  sea. 

5'  mu-sa[r  alan-na]  I  nscription  on  a  statue. 

ki-gal[-bi  nu-sar].  Its  pedestal  is  not  in- 

scribed^ 


G.     INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN(?) 

Only  a  few  traces  of  this  inscription  which  comprised  about  eight  lines 
are  preserved. 

H.     INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN 

15'  [sar-ru-G]l(  =  kin)  Sarru-kin, 

sar  king 

a-ga-de*  of  Agade, 


180  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

M  AS  K  I  M-G  I1  vicegerent 

dinanna  of  Inanna, 

2<y   sar  kis(i)  king  of  Kis, 

pa-ses  AN(  =  anim)  pasisu  of  Anu, 

sar  king 

KALAM-MAki  of  the  land, 

ISA(G)  (  =  isak)  isakku 

25'   den-lil  of  Enlil, 

in  KAS-[x  ]  in  a  battle 

uruk[ki]  Uruk 

LAM  +  KUR-a[r]  and 

u  50  isakkus 

30'    50  ISA(G)  he  vanquished 

in  KAK+GIS  with  the  battle  mace 

zam-a-ma  of  Zamama 

u  and 

URUki(  =  alam)  the  city 

35     [SA]G-GIS-[RA]  he  smote, 
[  .......  •  .....  1 

About  twenty-five  lines  at  the  beginning  of  Column  8  are  missing. 


Col.  8         [  ] 

[e-nin-markl] 

E-Ninmar 

[SAG+GIS-RA] 

he  smote 

[u] 

and 

dOr-su 

its  wall 

[(N)T]-GUL-GUL 

he  destroyed 

u 

and 

5'    [KALA]M(  =  mat)-su 

its  territory 

O2 

from 

la-BUR-S!R[-ri]?|ki 

Lagas 

1  Cf.  IGI  MASKIM-GT  in  Manistusu,  Obelisk,  A  Col.  14,  Case  6  (likewise  a  Semitic  text). 
MASKIM-Gl  is  perhaps  identical  with  MA§KIM-MI,  which  interchanges  with  the  simple 
MASK1M  in  the  name  of  the  god  dMASKlM-MI-lil-har-ra-an-na  (  =  d§UL-PA-e-a),  CT  24, 
617,  [dM]A§KlM-!ii-bar-ra-na(  =  dSUL-PA-«),  CT  24,  2215.  Note  that  mi  has  the  value  g5. 

*  Probably  =  istum. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE 


181 


[a]-ti-ma 


10 


15 


20 


25 


30' 


35' 


SAG-GIS-RA 

^TUKUL(  =  kag)-gi-su 

[in  t]i-a-am-  tim 

(N)I[-LAH] 

ub-me[ki] 

in  KAS-[x] 

LAM  +  KUR-ar 

u 

URUki(  =  alam) 

SAG-GIS-RA 

u 

BAD(  =  dur)-su 

(N)I-GUL-GUL 

sa[r-ru-G]I(  =  kin) 

sar 

KALAM-MAki 

[su2  den-l]il 

[ma-hi-]ra 

la  i-[t]i-|sum 

ti-a-am-|dam 

a-lf-dam 

u 

sa-bil-d[am] 


as  far  as 

the  sea 

he  smote; 

his  weapons 

he  washed 

in  the  sea. 

Ubme 

in  a  battle 

he  vanquished 

and 

the  city 

he  smote 

and 

its  wall 

he  destroyed. 

Unto  Sarru-kin, 

king  of 

the  land, 

Enlil 

(then)  gave 

no  rival,3 

the  upper 

and 

the  lower 

sea 


Here  some  thirty  lines  are  missing.     The  inscription  then  continues: 
Col.  9 


[ ] 

[sa  DUB(  =  duppam)] 

[su-]a 

u-sa-za-ku-ni 


Who  destroys 

this 

inscription, 


1  Written  over  an  erasure. 

1  Supplied  from  Col.  bis-;   perhaps  missing  in  our  passage. 

1  Perhaps  a  relative  sentence:   §arru-kin,  king  of  the  land,  to  whom  Enlil  (then)  gave  no 
rival.     See  note  to  618.20. 


182 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


den-lil 

u 
5'  dsamas 

SUHUS(  =  isdi)-su 

li-zu-ha 

u 

SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 
10'  li-il-gu-|da 

ma-na-ma 

DUL(  =  salmam) 

sCi-a 
15'  u-a-ha-ru 

den-Hl 


20 


\i-a-hlr 

gi§TUKUL(  =  kag)-su 

li-is-bir1 

mah-ri-is2 

den-Hl 

E-GUB 


Mu-sar-ra  ki-gal-ba 
25'  igi-lugal-zag-gi-si-s'ii 
a-ab-sar 


may  Enlil 

and 

Samas 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 

Whoever 

shall 

this 
image, 
may  Enlil 

his  name, 

may  he  break 

his  weapon ! 

Before 

Enlil 

he  has  set  (it)  up. 

Inscription  on  its  pedes- 
tal written  in  front  of 
Lugal-zaggisi. 


1  The  value  bir  of  the  sign  'v^  .which  follows  from  our  passage,  is  attested  by  the  vocabulary 
AO  5400,  published  by  Thureau-Dangin  in  RA  1912,  pp.  76  and  77,  where  11.  34  and  35  of  Col.  I 


have  to  be  restored  as  follows: 
34na-am 
»bi-ir        [  >f<P£ 


l]a-a 


Has  perhaps  the  sign  >f<|^Mf  (  =  NAM  +  BlR)  likewise  the  value  bir  (=  Hrbir)? 
2  The  sign  mah  has  here,  as  well  as  in  Col.  IOM,  the  form  $j&,  which  is  perhaps  peculiar  to 
the  inscriptions  of  the  empire  of  Akkad,  and  which  compares  with  the  form  ;JcdJ  as  the  sign 


us  compares  with  rfc^  us.  The  same  sign  for  mah  occurs  in  the  inscription  of  Libit-ili,  RA  10, 
p.  88,  Col.  lie;  read  there  mah-ri-is  (instead  of  si-ri-is)  den-lil  u-sa-ri-ib.  The  phrase  mahris 
dX  usarib  corresponds  to  the  Sumerian  phrase  igi-dX-su  i-ni-in-tu  in  the  date-formula  of  the 
6th  year  of  Samsu-iluna. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE 


183 


3ar-ru-Gl(  = 
lugal 
a-ga-deki 
30'   MASKIM-GI 

dinn[an]na 
[sar  ki]g(i) 
iSak 
den-lil 


Sarru-kin, 
king 

of  Agade, 
vicegerent 
of  Inanna, 
king  of  KiS, 
iSakku 
of  Enlil, 


The  rest  of  the  inscription,  about  thirty  lines,  is  missing. 

Col.    10         [ ] 

[mu-sar-ra 1 


Inscription 
written  . 


a-ab-sar 


I.  INSCRIPTION  ON  A  STATUE  OF  LUGAL-ZAGGISI 


lugal-zag-|gi-si      . 
5'    EN(  =  bel) 

KI-UNUki(  =  asariuruk) 
LUGAL(  =  §ar) 
KI-URlki(  =  asariuri) 
sa  DUB(  =  duppam) 
10'   su-a 

u-sa-za-ku[-ni] 

den-lil 

u 

dv  v 

samas 
15'   SUHUS(  =  isde)-su 

li-zu-ha 

u 

SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 
20'   li-il-gu-lda 


Lugal-zaggisi, 

lord 

of  the  land  of  Uruk, 

king 

of  the  land  of  Ur. 

Who  shall  destroy 

this 

inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and 


tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 


1  See  note  to  Col.  jig. 
VOL.  IV. 


184  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

ma-ma-na  Whoever 

DUL(  =  salmam)  shall  ...... 

su-a  this 

u-a-ha-ru  image, 

25'  den-lil  may  Enlil 

MU(  =  sum)-su  ........ 

\i-a-hir  his  name, 

gisTUKUL(  =  kak)-su  may  he  break 

li-is-bir  his  weapon. 

30'  mah-n-is  Before 

den-lil  Enlil 

E-GUB  he  has  set  (it)  up.1 

mu-sar-ra  Inscription  on  the  statue 
alan  (?)  lugal-zag-gi-si  of  Lugalzaggisi. 

K.   INSCRIPTIONS  OF  SARRU-KIN  ON  His  STATUE  AND  ITS 

PEDESTAL 

a.          35'  sar-ru-GI(  =  kin)  Sarru-kin, 

sar  king 

a-ga-dekl  of  Agade, 

Col.  ii        [  ..........  ]  ........ 

The  upper  portion  of  Column  1  1  is  missing. 


[sa  DUB(  =  duppam)]  Who  shall  destroy 

[su-a]  this 

[u-sa-za-ku-ni]  inscription, 

[den-lil]  may  Enlil 

[u]  and 

[dsamas]  Samas 

[SUHU$(  =  isdi)-su]  tear  out 

[li-zu-ha]  his  foundations 

[u]  and 

[SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su]  destroy 

[li-il-gu-da]  his  seed. 

[ma-ma-na]  Whoever 


1  7.  e.,  the  statue. 


A.   POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  AGADE 


185 


[DOL(  =  salmam)] 
[su-a] 

[u]-a-ha-ru 
den-lil 

MLJ(  =  ?um)-su 
li-a-Jzr 

5'  8iSTUKUL(  =  kak)-su 
li-is-bir 
mah-ri-is 
den-Hl 
E-GUB(  =  usaziz) 

I  Of  [mu-sar-ra  a]lan-na 

sar-ru-GI(  =  kin) 

sar 

kis(i) 

SAG-GIS-RA 
15'  ELAMki(  =  elamtim) 

u 

ba-ra-ah-sikl 

sa  DUB(  =  duppam) 

su-a 
20'  u-sa-za-ku-ni 

den-lil 

dv  v 

samas 

u 

dninni 
25'  SUHU$(  =  isdi)-su 

li-zu-ha1 

u 

SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 
30'  li-il-lgu-da1 

mu-sar-ra  ki-gal-ba 


shall 

this 
image, 
may  Enlil 

his  name, 

may  he  break 

his  weapon. 

Before 

Enlil 

he  set  it  up. 

Inscription  on  a  statue. 

Sarru-kin, 

king 

of  Ki$, 

smiter 

of  Elam 

and 

Barahsi. 

Who  shall  destroy 

this 

inscription, 

may  Enlil, 

Samas 

and 

Ninni 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 

Inscription  on  its 
pedestal. 


'Sic!    Should  be  plural:    li-zu-bu  and  li-il-gu-du.     The  dual  is  evidently  due  to  the  fact 
that  in  the  other  inscriptions  usually  only  Enlil  and  SamaJ  are  mentioned. 


186 

r- 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

UR 


UR 

ni[m 

t 


Here  about  nine  short  inscriptions  (upper  half  of  Column  12)  are  missing- 


Col.    12         [ ] 

v'         25'   da-gu 

SES-LUGAL  (ah  sarri) 
ba-ra-ah-si" 


nig-.  . . 
HE-niki 


o'          30'    nig-  .... 


bu-un?-ba-ankl 


zi-na 

isak 

hu-.. 


35'   hi-da-ri-da- . . 
isak 
gu-ni-la-ha1"? 

nig- 

sa-baki 

40'   nig- 

a-wa-ankl 

si-id-ga-u 

sakanak 

ba-ra-ah-si 


Dagu, 

brother  of  the  king 

of  Barahsi. 

Spoil 

of  Ganni? 

Spoil 

of  Bun(?)ban. 

Zina, 

the  isakku 

of  Hu. 


Hidarida.  . .  . , 
the  isakku 
of  Gunilaha. 

Spoil 
of  Saba? 

Spoil 
of  Awan. 

Sidgau, 

the  sakanakku 

of  Barahsi. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE 


187 


45'    kum-du-ba 

DI-KD(  =  da-i-ian) 
ba-ra-ah-siki 


nig-  .... 
su-si-imkl 


Kumduba, 
the  judge 
of  Baraftsi. 

Spoil 
of  Susa 


50'    ki-gal-ba  Su-du-a 


on  the  pedestal. 


L.  INSCRIPTION  OF  SARRU-KIN 
'   sa[r-ru-GI(  =  kin)]  Sarru-kin 


Here  about  forty-five  lines  (four  lines  of  Column  12  and  about  forty- 
one  lines  of  Column  13)  are  missing. 

'Col.  13        [ ]  

[u] 

30  [I SAG] 

LAM  +  KUR-ar 

URU-URU1 

za-ar-ru-ti[m] 

u-ID-ME?. .[. . .] 

[u] 


and  (over) 
thirty  isakkus 
hegained  the  victory 
the  guilty 
cities 

he 

and 


The  rest  of  Column  13,  the  whole  of  Column  14  and  likewise  the  whole 
•of  Column  15,  with  the  exception  of  the  following  lines,  are  missing. 

M.  INSCRIPTION  OF  $ARRU-KiN2 


a' Col.  15    sar-r[u-GI(  =  kin) 
$[ar] 
[a-g]a[-deki] 


Sarru-kin, 

king 

of  Agade, 


1  Written  over  erasure  which  read:  URUW-URUU 

2  Perhaps  continuation  of  an  inscription. 


188 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


After  about  ten  lines: 
de[n- 


The  rest  of  Column  1  5  is  missing. 

ff  [saDUB(  =  duppam)] 

[su-a] 

[u-sa-za-ku-ni] 
Col.  1  6       [den-lil] 

[u] 

[dsamas] 

S[UHUS(=  isdi)-su] 
5'  li[-zu-ha] 

[u] 

SE-NU[MUN(  =  zir)-su] 

[li-il-gu-da] 

After  a  gap  of  about  fifteen  lines: 

£'  [•  -1 


-ru 


isak 
si-ri-hi-im 

6'          25'  si-id-ga-ti 
sakanak 
ba-ra-ah-si[ki] 

i'  sa-nam-si-m[u 

Sakanak 
30'  ELAMki 


Who  shall  destroy 

this 

inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and 

Samas 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 


ru, 

the  isakku 
of  Sirihum, 

Sidgau, 

the  sakanakku 

of  Barahsi, 

Sanamsimu. . ., 
the  sakanakku 
of  Elam. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  AGADE 


109 


DUMU(  =  mar)  fci- 

LUGAL 
ELAMki 

X'  kum-du-ba 

35'  D1-[KD]  (  =  daijan) 
[ba-ra-ah-siki] 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 


the  son  of  hji. . 

king 

of  Elam. 

Kumduba, 
the  judge 
of  Barahsi. 


N.   INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 


Col.  1 6 


[(i)n2-mu-us]3 

[sar] 

[kis(i)] 

[in  KAS-x] 

[uriki] 

[u] 

[ub-meki] 

[LAM  +  KUR-ar] 

[u] 


[u-sa-am-ki-it] 
[5460] 
[LU+SU] 
Col.  17       [SU-DO-A(  = 

[u] 
[K]A-[AZAG] 

V  V 

sar 

5    uriki 
SU-DO-A 


iksud)] 


Rimus, 

king 

of  Kis, 

in  the  battle  with 

Ur 

and 

Umma 

he  gained  the  victory 

and 

8040  men 

he  cast  down; 

5460 

prisoner^ 

his  hand  captured, 

and 

KA-AZAG, 

king 

of  Ur, 

his  hand  captured, 


1  Perhaps  mil? 

2  Or  (e)rf. 

*  Cf.  inscription  p. 


190  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM  —  BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

U  and 

ISAG-ISAG(  =  isakki)-su  his  isakkus 

SU-DO-A  his  hand  captured, 

10    u  and 


SU[-DU-A  his  hand  captured, 

[u]  and 

a-t[i-ma]  as  far  as 

1  5     ti-a-am-[tim]  the  lower 

sa-bil-tim  sea 

sa  .........  ....... 

u  and 

57OO1  5700 

20  GURUS-GURUS(  =  zikari)        men 

in  URU^-URU1*1  from  the  cities 

su-me-ri-im[    ]  of  the  Sumerian 

u-su-zi-am-  ma  he  brought  out  and 

25     a-na  to 

ga-ra-si-im  ........ 

is-kum  he  .......  ed  them,2 

u  and 

URUki-URUki(  =  ali)-su-nu  their  cities 

30    SAG-GIS-RA  he  smote 

u  and 

BAD-BAD(  =  duri)-su-nu  their  walls 

(N)T-GUL-GUL  he  destroyed 

0-LUM  .........  , 

35     in  ta-a-ri-su  on  his  return  march 

ka-za-lukl  Kazallu, 

na-ki-ir-ma  which  had  revolted, 

1  3600+3X600+5X60=5700.  The  scribe  uses  here  the  usual  Sumerian  numeral  system, 
in  which  the  next  higher  magnitude  after  the  ner(  =  6oo)  is  the  sar(  =  36oo).  Note  that  in  this 
system  the  corner  wedge  is  used  instead  of  the  circle. 

2Garasum  is  probably  identical  with  karasum.  Perhaps  the  meaning  of  the  passage  is: 
"and  to  punishment  (destruction)  he  condemned(?)  them;"  cf.  the  phrase  ana  karaSi  imnu 
"to  punishment(P)  he  delivered  them."  (Or  can  karaSu  be  a  synonym  of  Sallatu  "booty," 
"prisoners"?) 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF   AOADE 

SAG-G1S-RA  he  smote 


191 


The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing.1 

O.  INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 

The  beginning  of  the  inscription  is  missing, 
a.  Col.  18        [ ] 


13. 


KAS-x..[ ] 

5  DUL(  =  salam)-su 

ib-ni-ma 

a-na 

den-lil 

sa-lf-mi-su 
10  A-MU-RU 

sa  DUB(  =  duppam) 

su-a 

u-sa-za-ku-ni 

den-lil 
15  u 

dsamas 

SUHU$(  =  isdi)-su 

li-zu-ha 

u 
20  SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 

li-il-gu-da 

ki-gal-an-ta  igi-ni-su 
a-ab-sar 

25  ma-na-ma 
(i)ri-mu-us 


battle , 

his  image 

he  made  and 

to 

Enlil, 

his  ally, 

he  dedicated  it. 

Who  shall 

destroy 

this  inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and 

Sama! 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 

The  upper  .  . . . ,  written 
before  him.2 

Whoever 
shall  destroy 
the  name 


1  For  the  continuation  of  the  text  compare  inscription  q. 
2 1.  e.,  in  front  of  the  picture  of  Lugal-zaggri. 


192 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


sarn 

kis(i) 
30    u-sa-za-ku-ni 

al  DUL(  =  salmi) 

(i)n-mu-us 

MU(  =  sum)-su 
35    i-sa-ga-nu- ma 

DUL(  =  salam)  mi-me 

u? 

[ 1 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 

/Col.  19       [ ] 

5    isak 
ub-mekl 


of  Rimus, 

king 

of  Kis, 

or  upon  the  image 

of  Rimus 

shall  place 

his  name, 

or  the  image  of  some 

one  (else) 
or  . 


isakku 
of  Ubme. 


ilum-u-MES 

a-li-ik 

mah-ri-su 

10    KA-AZAG 

sar 
uriki 


Ilum-u-MES, 

his 

predecessor. 

KA-AZAG, 

king 

of  Ur. 


ki-gal-ki?-ta  bur 
lu-dda-mu 


The  lower  . . . ,  . 
of  Lu-Damu. 


P.   INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 


1 5    (i)ri-mu-us 
sar 
kis(i) 
in  KAS-x 


un 
20    u 


Rimus, 

king 

of  Kis, 

in  the  battle 

with  Ur 

and 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE 


193 


[ub-me]ki 

LAM  +  KUR-ar 

u 

80401  GURUS 
25    u-sa-am-|ki-it 

5460* 

LU+SU 

SU-DO-A 
30    u 

KA-AZAG 

sar 


urikl 


SU-DO-A 


35 


Umma 

he  gained  the  victory 

and 

8040  men 

he  cast  down; 

5460 

prisoners 

his  hand  captured 

and 

KA-AZAG 

king 

of  Ur, 

his  hand  captured 

and 


=  nar?) 


The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing;  for  the  continuation  cf.  inscrip- 
tion w. 

Q.   INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 

Col.  20       [(i)ri-mu-us] 
[sar] 
[kis(i)] 

[in  KAS-.].... 
5    ka-za-luki 

1 2650' GURUS 
u-sa-[am]-|ki-it 
10    5864*     LU+SU 
SU-DO-A 
u 

a-sa[-n] 
ELAMfT(«elamtim?) 


king 

of  KiS: 

in  the  battle 

with  Kazallu 

he  slew 

12650  men 

and  5864  prisoners 

his  hand  captured, 

and 

in  the  land 

of  Elam 


1 1X6000+3X600+4X60=8040. 

2  9X600+ 1  X6o=  5460. 

3  2X6000+ 1X600+5X10=  12650. 

4  6000-  (2X60+ 10+6)  =  5864. 


194  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

15  [URUki]-URUki  the  cities 

SU-DO-A  his  hand  captured 

u  and 

BAD(  =  dur)-. . .  theirwall$(fortress«) 

(N)I-GUL-GUL  he  destroyed. 

20  sa  DUB  Who 

su-a  shall  destroy 

u-sa-za-ku-ni  this  inscription, 

den-lil  may  Enlil 

u  and 

25  dsamas  Samas 

SUHU$(  =  isdi)-su  tear  out 

li-zu-ha  his  foundations 

u  and 

SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su  destroy 

30  li-il-|gu-da  his  seed. 


ki-gal-ki-ta  on  the  lower  . . 

a-zi-da-na  at  his  right  hand 

R.  INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 

(i)ri-mu-us  Rimus, 

35  [lugal]  king 

[kis(i)]  of  Kis, 


Here  about  thirty-five  lines  are  missing.    The  inscription  then  continues 
in  Column  21 : 

Col.  21          [ ]  

u-[s]u-[z]i[-a]m-  ma  he  brought  out  and 

5  a-na  to 

ga-ra-si-im  

is-kum  he ed  them.1 

sa  DUB  (duppam)  Who  shall 

su-a  destroy 

1  Cf.  inscription  «26-27. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  AGADE 


195 


10  u-sa-za-ku-ni 
den-lil 
u 
Mannas' 


15 


$E-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 


20  ....  ki-gal  ki[-ta] 
egir-ra-ni-<>ii 


this  inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and 

Samas' 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 

....  of  the  lower  slab 
behind  him. 


S.  INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 


(i)rf-mu-us 

sar 

kis(i) 
25  in  KAS-x 

ub-meki 

u 

KI-ANki 

LAM  +  KUR-ar 
30  u 

SpooHGURUS-GURUS 

u-sa-am-ki-it 

35402LU+$U 
35  [SU-DD-A] 

[ I 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 

Col.  22      5    ....  -ki-gal-ki-[t]a 
da-.  .      .  .-ni-sii 


Rimus, 

king 

of  Ki$, 

in  the  battle  with 

Umma 

and 

Der 

he  gained  the  victory 

and 

8900  men 

he  cast  down; 

3540  prisoners 

he  made. 


....  of  the  lower  slab 
at  his.  . 


1  6000+5X600— (6o+4X  io)  = 

2  6X600— 60  =  3540. 


196 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


zi-nu-ba 
SES(  =  ah) 
ISA(G)(  =  isakki) 

10    a- -mu-bi 

sukkal-su 


Zinuba, 
the  brother 
of  the  isakku. 

A mubi, 

his  sukkallu. 


8. 


lugal-us[umgal]? 
isak 

NINNI-UNU" 


Lugal-usumgal(?), 
the  isakku 
of  Hallab. 


e.  15    ur- sm 

sukkal-su 


Ur-Sin, 

his  sukkallu. 


. . . .  -KA 

isak 

KI-ANki 


the  isakku 
of  Der. 


20 


GAL-SUKKAL-su1 


his  rab-sukkal. 


B.  ki-KU-I(D) 

isak 
la-SlR-BUR* 

i.  25    ab-da 

sakanakku 


Ki , 

the  isakku 
of  Lagas. 

Abda, 

the  sakanakku 


ki-gal-ki-gub- 
sub-ba-me-e? 


Slabs  

. . .  standing  place. 


T.  INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 


(i)ri-mu-us 
30    s[ar] 


Rimus, 
king 


^f.  IGI  GAL-SUKKAL-li,  "in  the  presence  of  the  rab-sukkal,"  ManiStusu,  Obelisk,  A 
Col.   I3u. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE 

SU-[ 

ma-[ 


197 


The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing.1 


U.  INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 


AO  5476^  HOT  No.  34, 
Cols.  25  and  26;  No.  36, 
Rev.  Col.  4'. 


HGT  No.  34, 
Columns  23  and  24. 

Col.  23. 


(i)ri-mu-us 

a.        [(i)ri-mu-us] 

Rimu§, 

sar 

[Sar] 

king 

kis(i) 

[kis(i)] 

of  Ki§: 

in  KAS-x 

[in  KAS-x] 

in  a  battle 

a-ba-al-ga-mas 

5   [a-ba-al-ga-ma§] 

Abalgamas', 

sar 

[V  V 
sar 

king 

ba-ra-ah-sikl 

[ba-ra-ah-siki] 

of  Barahsi, 

LAM  +  KUR-ar 

[LAM  +  KUR-a]r 

he  vanquished 

u 

[u] 

and 

si-id-ga-u 

10  s[i-id-ga-]u 

Sidga'u, 

3akanak-su 

sakanak 

sakanakku 

ba-ra-ah-siki 

of  Barahsi, 

SU-DO-A 

SU-DO-A 

his  hand  captured, 

u 

and 

15    ...-ga-pi 

....gapi, 

sakanak 

sakanakku 

ZAf-                 ]k3 

of  3 

SU-DO-A 

his  hand  captured 

in  ba-ri-ti 

in  ba-ri-ti 

between 

a-wa-ankl 

20  a-wa-ankl 

Awan 

u 

u 

and 

1  Possibly  this  is  the  beginning  of  inscription  «. 

1  Published  by  Thureau-Dangin  in  RA  1911,  p.  136. 

3  Perhaps  za[-ab-sa-li]w? 


198 


su-s-m 


kl 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

.ki 


su-si-im 


KABGUNU-NI-tim        KABGUNU-NI-tim 


NE-RU-dam 
in  a-sa-ar-ri1 
al-su2 
is-bu-uk 


25  u 

NE-RU-dam 


Susa 


and 


in  a-sa-ar- 


r 


SUHUS  (  =  isdi) 

ba-ra-ah-si 

in  UKU(  =  nisi) 

ELAMki(  =  elamtim) 

i-zu-uh-ma 


al-su-nu 
30  is-bu-uk 
u 

URUki-URUki 
ELAMki(  =  elamtim) 
SAG-GIS-RA 

35  u 

BAD-BAD-su-nu 

(N)I-GUL-GUL 

u 

SUHUS(  =  isdi) 
40  b[a]-r[a]-a[h]-s[i]kn 

[ I 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  is 
missing. 


upon  them3 

he  poured  out  (heaped 


and 

the  cities 

of  Elam 

he  smote 

and 

their  walls 

he  destroyed 

and 

the  foundations 

of  Barahsi 

from  the  people 

of  Elam 

he  tore  out,  and 


[up) 


1  A-Sa-ar-rl  (gen.  pi.),  which  Thureau-Dangin  in  RA  191 1,  p.  137  takes  as  the  name  of  a  city, 
is  probably  identical  with  a-sa-ar-ru  (gen.  pi.)  in  the  neo-Babylonian  inscription  on  the  reverse 
of  a  small  brick  containing  the  impression  of  an  inscription  of  Sarru-kin  (now  in  the  University 
Museum);  cf.  The  Museum  Journal,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  23.  The  neo-Babylonian  inscription  runs: 
Jzi-i-PA  a-gur-ruabnuusl  25a  a-sa-ar-ru  pa-li-su-tim  35a  i-na  £-GAL  a-sa-ar-ru,  43a  dna-ra-am-  dsin 
Sarri  5i-na  ki-ir-ba  a-ga-deklIdnabu-zira-SI-SA  dupsarru  i-mu-ru,  "impression  of  (the  inscription 

on)  the  blocks  (or  a  block)  of  diorite  stone  from  the ed  (or ing)  , 

which  Nabu-zira-SI-SA,  the  scribe,  has  seen  in  the  palace  of of  Naram-Sin,  the  king, 

in  the  city  of  Akkad."  According  to  this  the  asarrti  were  the  chief  characteristic  of  the  palace 
of  Naram-Sin;  does  e-gal  a-sa-ar-ru  perhaps  mean  "stone  palace,"  i.  e.,  a  palace  not  built  entirely 
of  bricks,  but  (partly)  of  blocks  of  stone? 

2 That  al-su  does  not  mean  "his  city"  (thus  Thureau-Dangin,  loc.  cit.)  follows  from  the 
fact  that  alu  "city"  is  written  URUkl  at  the  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Agade;  cf.,  e.  g.,  URUkl- 
LJRUkl  in  1.  32  of  our  inscription.  Moreover,  Thureau-Dangin's  translation  "dans  ASarri,  sa 
ville,"  would  require  the  genitive  form  alisu.  For  al  "upon,"  "against,"  compare:  ma-na- 

ma al  DUL(  =  salmi)  rf-mu-us  MU(  =  sum)-su  i-sa-ga-nu-ma,  below,  Col.  2524-28,  and  the 

names  gl5TUKUL(  =  kagj-ga-su-al-si-in,  "his  weapon  upon  them  (i:  e.,  the  hostile  nations)  (he 
has  hurled),"  Obelisk  of  ManiStusu,  A  Col.  135,  and  iidar-al-su  "Istar  (watches)  over  him," 
ibid.  B  Col.  2'. 

3  Do  the  pronouns  su  and  sunu  refer  to  the  two  sakanakkus  mentioned  in  11.  10-17? 


A.    POE BEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADB 


199 


(i)ri-mu-us> 


kiS 

ELAMki(  =  elamtam) 

den-lil 

C-GAL-SI1 

dsamas 

u 

zam-a-ma 

U-MA 

la-zu-ra-tim 

LU.GI.NI-is-ma2 


RimuS, 

king 

of  KiS, 

subjected 

Elam; 

Enlil 


and 
Zamama 


Inscription  on  a  statue 


[mu-sar-ra  alan-na] 

COL.  24 
[sa  DUB(  =  tuppam)]     Who  shall 


sa  DLJB(tuppam) 

su-a 

[u-s]a-za-ku-[ni] 

den-lil 

u 

dv  v 

samas 

SUHUS(  =  isd^)-su  m 
li-zu-ha  li-zu-ha 

u  u 

SE-NUMUN-su  SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su  destroy 

li-il-gu-da  15  li-il-|gu-da  his  seed. 


[su-a] 
5  [u-sa-za-ku-ni] 


[u] 
dsama§ 


destroy 

this  inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and 

SamaS 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 


ki-gal -§u 

[a]-ab-sar 


written 


at 


1  Perhaps  (a-na)  den-lil  6-gal-5i  "to  Enlil  he  subjected  it  (i.  e.,  Elam),"  or  "Enlil  subjected 
it  (to  him)"(?);   cf.  Col.  ajwjo. 

.    *  Perhaps  (a-na)  d§ama§  u  zam-a-mai Iu-gi-l-i5-ma,  "unto  §ama$  and  Zamama,  indeed. 

he  has  presented(P) ,"  or  diamas  Q  zam-a-m2i i5-ma,  "§ama5  and  Zamama  heard 

(granted) "(?) 


VOL.  IV. 


200 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


y.     ma-na-ma 
MU(  =  sum) 

20  (i)ri-mu-us 
Sarri 
kiS(i) 

u-sa-za-ku-ma 
al  DOL(  =  salam) 

25  (i)ri-mu-us 
MU(  =  sum)-su 
i-sa-ga-nu-|ma 


35 


Whoever 

shall  destroy 

the  name 

of  Rimus, 

king 

of  Ki§,  and 

upon  the  image 

of  Rimus 

shall  place 

his  name  or  (to  set  up) 


DOL(  =  salam)  mi-me    the  image  of  anyone  else 


30   - 


den-lil 
be-al 


DUL(  =  salmim)  su-a 
u 

Mamas' 

SUrJUS(  =  i3di)-su 
li-zu-ha 
u 

[SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su]destroy 
40  [li-il-gu-da]  his  seed. 

[  ............  I  ....... 

[  ..........  1  ....... 


shall  command,1 

may  Enlil, 

the  lord 

of  this  image, 

and 

SamaS 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 


V.     INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 


The  beginning  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 


[ 


ga-la-ma 
i-ti-sum 

10    ti-a-am-dam 
a-li-dam 
u 


* 
in  its  entirety 

he  gave  unto  him. 

The  upper 

and 

the  lower 


1  Cf.  36  Rev.  Col.  41.4. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE  201 

sa-bil-dam  sea 

u  and 

is    SA-TU-e(  =  3ad£)  all 

ga-la-su-nu-  ma  the  mountain  lands 

a-na  unto 

den-lil  Enlfl 

20   u-ga-al  he  subjected. 

Sa  DUB(  =  duppam)  Who  shall  destroy 

su-a  this 

u-sa-za-ku-ni  inscription, 

den-lil  may  Enlil 

25    u  and 

d§amas  Samas 

SUHUS(  =  isdi)-su  tear  out 

li-zu-ha  his  foundations 

u  and 

30    SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su  destroy 

li-il-lgu-da  his  seed. 

mu-sar-ra  ki-gal-ba  Inscription  on  its  pedestal. 

W.    INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS 

(i)ri-mu-us  Rimus, 

35    sar  king 

kiS(i)  of  Ki§, 

SAG-GIS-RA  smiter 

EILAM*]  of  Elam 

[u]  and 

40    ba-r[a-ah-siki]  Barahsi. 


X.     INSCRIPTION  OF 

(i)ri-mu-uS  Rimus, 

iar  king 

kiS(i)  of  KiS: 


202 


UNIVERSITY  MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


45 


50 


55 


in  [KAS-x] 

a-ba-a[l-ga-ma§] 

Par] 

[ba-ra-ah-si"] 

[LAM  +  KUR-ar] 

[i>] 

[si-id-ga-u] 

[sakanak-su] 

[SU-DU-A] 

[in  ba-ri-ti] 

aj-wa-an"] 

M 


60 


KABGUNU-NI-tim 

[u] 

NE-R[U-dam] 
in  a-sa[-ar-n] 
[al-su] 
[i^-bu-uk] 


65 


[ba-ra-ah-sikl] 
Col.  26       [inUKU(  =  n 
[ELAMki] 
[i-zu-uh-ma] 
[(i)ri-mu-us] 
5    Par] 
[kis(i)] 
[ELAMki] 


i  o    [u-gal-jf*] 
dsamas 


in  a  battle 

Abalgamas, 

king 

of  Barahsi, 

he  vanquished, 

and 

Sidgau, 

his  sakanakku, 

his  hand  captured. 

Between 

Awan 

and 

Susa 


and 


upon  him 

he  poured  out  (heaped 

and  [up) 

the  foundations 

of  Barahsi 

he  tore  out 

from  among 

the  peoples  ot  Elam, 

and  Rimus, 

king 

of  Ki§, 

subjugated 

Elam. 

Enlil 


Samas 


1  See  inscription  u. 
JOr  i-be-al=ib(al? 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  AGADE  203 

u  ^  and 

zam-a-ma  Zamama 

U-MA 

15    la  zu-ra-tim  

LU  GI  NI  iS-lma  > 

$a  DUB  Who  shall  destroy 

su-a  this 

20   u-sa-za-ku-ni  inscription, 

den-lil  may  Enlil 

ft  and 

dsamas  SamaS 

SUyUS(  =  isdi)-su  tear  out 

25    li-zu-ha  his  foundations 

u  and 

$E-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su  destroy 

li-il-|gu-da  his  seed. 

30    mu-sar-ra  SIN-za-lum  Inscription  on  a 


Y.     INSCRIPTION  OF  RIMUS  IN  SUMERIAN  AND  AKKADIAN' 

Col.  28.  Col.  27. 

[(i)n-mu-us]  [(i)ri-mu-us]  Rimus, 

[lugal]  [sar]  king 

[kis(i)]  [kis(i)]  of  KiS; 

[ti-ul-li-a-ta]  [is-tum  um(i)  ii-a-tim]    since  The  days  of  old 

$  [den-lil-ra]  5  [a-na  de]n[-lil]  nobody 

[lu-na-me]  [ma-na-ma]  had  made 

[alan-an-na3]  [DUL-KU-AN4  a  statue  of  lead 

1  See  inscription  u. 

2  The  same  inscription  on  a  broken  clay  tablet  (AO  5477)  published  by  I  hureau-Dangin  in 
RA  VIII,  p.  138. 

'Or  alan-nagga,  alan-niggi  an(n)a(k),  as  loanword  in  Akkadian  anaku.  is  the  genitive  of 
an  "Anu"  before  which  we  must  supply  ku  "metal":  ku-an-na  "the  metal  of  Anu";  cf.  in  the 
Akkadian  inscription  KU-AN.  i.  e..  "metal  of  Anu."  Nagga  and  niggi  have  evidently  developed 
from  ana(k). 

4  (  =  salam  anaki). 


204 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


nu-ta-dim 

(i)ri-mu-us 
10  lugal 

kis(i) 

alan-na-ni 

an-na-kam1 

(n)i-dim 
15  igi-den-lil-la-su 

(n)i-gub 

NI-UL- 

dingir-ri-ne-ka 

me-te-ni 
20  (n)l-SlTI 

m 

im-sar-ra-e 
ab-ha-lam-me-a 
den-Hl 
25  dutu-bi 
sulius-sa-ni 
Jie-pa'd-du-|[h]e 
[numun-na-n]i 

30 1 r,-.. 


la  ib-ni 
(i)ri-mu-uS 
10  sar 
kiS(i) 

DUL-su  sa  KU-AN 
(sa  AN)2 

ib-ni-ma 
15  IGI-ME  |  den-lil 

i-za-az 

DA-is  i-li 
(i-li)3 

MU-su4 

u-sa-mi-id 
20  sa  DUB(  =  duppam) 

sd-a 

u-sa-za-ku-ni 

den-lil 
25  u    dsamas 


30 


li-zu-J)a 

SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 


mu-sar-ra  .    .  SIN-za-lum 


for  Enlil. 

Rimus, 

king 

of  Kis, 

made 

his  statue 

of  lead 

and  before  Enlil 

it  stands; 

on  (to)  the 

of  the  gods 

he  caused  his  glory 

to  be ed. 

Who 

shall  destroy 

this  inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and  Samas 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and  destroy 

his  seed. 

Inscription  on  the 
of  the  . 


1  There  is  a  dividing  line  in  the  text  between  11.  13  and  14,  indicating  that  in  the  original 
from  which  our  copy  was  made  a  new  column  began  with  1.  14  (or  15);  the  original  inscriptions, 
the  Sumerian  as  well  as  the  Akkadian,  were  therefore  arranged  in  two  columns. 
•  ^Erasure. 

3  Have  we  perhaps  to  read  i-du-dingir-ne-ka  =  i(t)ti-i5  i-li  "at  the  side''?)  of  the  gods," 
i.  e.,  "equal  to  the  gods"  (he  caused  his  splendor  to  be  reckoned)? 

4  Evidently  we  have   to  read  sum-su;  sumu   (or  perhaps  us(u)mu?),  which  was  the  pro- 
riunciation  of  Sumu  "name"  at  the  time  of  the  dynasty  of  Agade,  would  then  of  course  be  a 
derivation  from  the  root  ysm  and  have  the  same  meaning  as  simtum  =  me-te. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE 


20 


Z.     INSCRIPTION  OF   MANI§TUSUI 


a.  Col.  26  ma-an-is-|tu-su 
3ar 
kiS(i) 
35    i-nu 

an-<>a-ankl 
ti 

v\o      '   i  ki 

sr-ri-hu-um 
40   SAG-GlS-RA-|ni 

ti-a-am-tim 

sa-bil-tim 

MA-MA 

[LUGAL-]LUGAL 
45    [URUki-URUki] 

a-bar-ti 

ti-a-am-tim 

32  a-na 

KAS-x  (  =  tahazim) 
50    ip-hu-ru-|nim-ma 

LAM  +  KUR-ar 

u 

URUki-URUki-su-nu 
55    SAG-GIS-RA 

EN-E[N-su-nu]3 


ManiStusu, 

king 

of  Ki!: 

when 

AnSan 

and 

Sirihum 

he  had  smitten, 

the  lower 

sea 

in  ships  he  crossed; 

32  kings  of 

the  cities 

on  the  other  side 

of  the  sea 

had  rallied 

to 

battle 

and  he  defeated  them 

and 

their  cities 

he  smote, 

(and)  their  lords 


1  A  fragment  of  the  original  inscription  on  a  diorite  block  from  Nippur  is*  published  as  No. 
35  of  this  publication.  Two  diorite  fragments  with  parallel  inscriptions  from  Sippar  arc  B.M. 
56630  (=  A.H.  82-7-14,  1023)  and  B.  M.  56631  (=  A. 14.82-7-14,  1024),  both  quoted  by  Jensen 
in  ZA  15  p.  248,  note  i,  and  published  in  CT  32,  5;  another  diorite  fragment  from  Susa  is  pub- 
lished by  Scheil  in  Textes  elamites-s'mitiques  V,  pi.  II  B. 

-  Sign  jif  (  =  Iu,  ie,  Si).  Since  in  inscription  m  (§arru-kin)  an  i$ak  5i-ri-hi-im  (written  with 
the  sign  igu)  is  mentioned  side  by  side  with  the  Sakanakku  of  Barahsi  and  the  sakanakku  of 
Flam,  the  si-ri-hu-umkt  of  ManiStusu's  inscription  and  the  Siribum  of  Sarru-kin  are  evidently 
identical.  The  writing  of  the  name  with  the  sign  @  (=  tii,  te)  on  the  Cruciform  Monument 
(CT  32,  1-4,  Col.  2  18an-Sa-ankl  19u  ^TE-ri-hu-um*1')  is  therefore  probably  a  mistake,  unless 
I  eribum  be  a  variant  of  Serihum,  which,  however,  is  not  very  likely.  At  any  rate,  a  reading 
ku-ri-hu-umkl  (Thureau-Dangin,  RA  VIII,  p.  183;  King,  RA  IX.  p.  1)4)  is  excluded,  since  the 
sign  is  not  £T  in  either  case 

3  The  following  lines  are  supplied  from  the  fragment  Scheil,  Textes  i-lamites-scmitiques  V. 
pi.  1)4  Col.  i. 


206 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


60 


65 


70 


Col.  27 


35 


40 


45 


[u-sa-am-|  ki-it] 


a-ti-ma 

hu-ri  KU(  =  kaspim?) 

il-gu-ut 

SA-TU-e  (  =  sade) 

a-bar-ti 

ti-a-am-tim 

NA-NA-su-nu-mi 

i-bu-la-ma 

[DUL(  =  salam)-su] 

[ib-ni-ma] 

a-na 

den-lil 

A-MU-RU 

dsamas 

u 

zam-a-ma 

U-MA 

la-zu-ra-tum2 

LU.GI.NI-is(-ma)3 

§a  DUB(  =  duppam) 

su-a 

u-sa-za-ku-ni 


he  cast  down, 

and 

the  whole  country 


as  far  as 

the  silver  mines, 

he  destroyed. 

The  mountains 

beyond 

the  sea, 

their  stones 

be  broke 

and  bis  statue 

be  fashioned1  and 

to 

Enlil 

he  dedicated  it. 

Samas 

and 

Zamama 


s[amas] 


Who  shall  destroy 

this 

inscription 

may  Enlil 

and 

Samas 


1  Lines  70-72  are  supplied  from  the  analogous  passages  in  inscription  y  (see  above)  and  the 
inscription  of  Naram-Sin,  Scheil,  TES  III,  p.  2,  Col.  2.    The  passage  in  the  latter  inscription 
evidently  must  be  read  8n  SA-TU-su-nu  9NA-NA  e-si-i[m]  10i-bu-lam-ma,  "in  their  mountains  he 
broke  esu  (i.  e.,  diorite)  rocks  and"  etc.     Note  that  the  statue  on  which  the  inscription  is 
engraved  is  of  diorite. 

2  In  the  inscriptions  of  Rimus  (u  and  U)  la-zu-ra-tim! 

3  The  sign  ma  seems  to  be  erased  by  the  scribe. 

4  See  inscription  u. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  AGADE 


207 


SUHUS(  =  i§dt)-su 
li-zu-ha 
50    u 

SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su 
li-il-gu-da 

[mu-sar-ra ] 

55    [ma]-an-is'-|[tu-]su 

[kis(i)] 
a-[na] 
60   den-lil 
a-mu-ru 

mu-sar-ra  ki-gal-ba 

Col.  28   den-lil 

ma-an-is-  tu-su 
35    sar 

kis(i) 

den-lil 

u-da-|bi-su 
40    MU  =  §um)-su 

i-bf 

u 


tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 

Inscription  on  a  ... 

ManiStusu, 

king 

of  Ki$: 

to 

Enlil 

he  has  dedicated  (it). 

Inscription  on  its  pedestal.1 

Enlil: 

"Manistusu, 

king 

of  Ki$, 

Enlil 

has ed  him" 

he  called 

its  name, 

and 

to  Enlil 

be  dedicated  it.* 


1  Inscription  ft  corresponds  to  the  inscription  engraved  in  larger  characters  on  the  fragment 
B.M.  56631  to  the  left  of  the  main  inscription  which  is  written  in  smaller  characters  and  corre- 
sponds to  a.     As  the  monolith  B.  M.  56631  was  set  up  in  the  temple  of  SamaS  at  Sippar  (it  was 
found  at  Abu-Habba),  the  dedication  runs  in  the  case  of  course:    [ma-an-iJ-|tul-su  *lS]ir  *tkijJ(i) 
4[a-]na  5[-]5amaS  «[A-MU]-RU. 

2  In  better  English:  "Enlil  has ed  ManiStusu.  king  of  Ki$;"  (thus)  he(i.  t.,  Maniitusu) 

called  its  (i.  e.,  the  statue's)  name  and  dedicated  it  to  Enlil.    The  name  of  the  god  is  placed 
at  the  beginning  of  the  inscription  in  order  to  make  it  conspicuous;  it  is  later  taken  up  again 

ir  the  dative  ana  Enlil. 


208 


UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


45 


50 


Sa  DUB(  =  duppam) 

su-a 

u-sa-za-ku-ni 

den-lil 

ft 

dsama<> 

SUHUS(  =  isdi)-su 


[li-zu-]ha 
[u] 

55    [SE-NUMUN(  =  zir)-su] 


[ 1 

[ ] 

[ ] 

[ ] 


Who  shall  destroy 

this 

inscription, 

may  Enlil 

and 

Samas 

tear  out 

his  foundations 

and 

destroy 

his  seed. 


REMARK  OF  THE  COMPILER  OF  THE  INSCRIPTIONS 


Col.  i7 


3' 


LEFT  EDGE 


[ ]-si' 

[ I 

Sar-ru-GI(  =  kin) 

(i)ri-mu-us 
ma-an-is- 

[tu-s]u 
Sa-e-kur-ra 

a-na-me-a-bi 


Inscriptions 


of  Sarru-kin, 
Rimus, 
and  Manis- 

tusu, 

as  many  as  therejare 
in  Ekur. 


Probably  we  have  to  supply  [luga!-zag-gi-]si,  "of  Lugal-zaggisi." 


.A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE 


No.  35 
FRAGMENT  OF  ORIGINAL  INSCRIPTION  OF  MANISTUSU' 

The  beginning  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 


[LUGAL-LUGAL] 

[a-bar-ti] 

ti-a[-am-tim] 

32  a-[na] 

taha[zim] 

ip-hu-r[u-]nim-m[a] 

[LAM  +  KUR]-ar 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 


32  kings 

of  the  country  beyond 
the  sea, 
to 

battle 
assembled 
and  he  gained  the 
victory. 


No.  36 
COPIES  OF  INSCRIPTIONS  OF  RIMUS  AND  NARAM-SIN 

OBVERSE  (OR  REVERSE?)2 

Only  a  few  signs  of  Col.  i'  are  preserved.     The  beginning  of  Col.  2' 
is  missing. 


Col.  2'  (4')  [.......] 

[dinnanna] 

an-n[u]-n[i-tzm] 

u 

AN-nim(  =  anim) 


with  the  help 

of  I  star, 

the  Annunitu, 

and 

Anu, 


1  Cf.  34  Cols.  26  and  27. 

2  As  the  fragment  published  as  No.  36  represents  only  a  small  portion  of  a  very  large  tablet. 
it  is  impossible  to  make  out  with  certainty  which  side  is  the  obverse  and  which  the  reverse. 
The  side  designated  as  obverse  in  the  copy  has  been  designated  as  such  only  because  the  side 
of  the  fragment  is  flat,  while  the  other  is  convex;   but  note  that  then  the  inscription  of  Rimu> 
in  Col.  5  of  the  Reverse  would  follow  the  inscriptions  of  Naram-Sin,  a  fact  which  would  be  rather 
strange. 


210 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


5'  na-ra-am-|dsin 
da-num 
in  KAS-x(  =  tahazi) 

i  ...........  i" 

The  lower  portion  of  the  column  is  missing. 
The  beginning  of  Col.  3'  is  missing. 


0)1.3' 


I  .....  ]-.[  ......  1 

u 

[x+]6oo+3x6o+4[o] 

+  5  LO 

5'  in  KAS-x  (  =  tahazim) 
i-ik-mi 
u 

a-na 

[..].-x2-NUN 
10'    ...  ......  3-tim 


I  ........  ].... 


'5'  I 


[SAG-GIS-]RA 

u 

[BAD  (  =  dur)]-su 

[(N)I-]GUL-GUL 

20'    U 

[I]D(  =  naram) 
[i-na]  kir-bi-su 
u-su-zi 

The  lower  portion  of  the  column  is  missing. 


Naram-Sin, 
the  mighty, 
in  a  battle1 


and 
x+825  men 

he  made  prisoners 

in  battle 

and 

to 


the  city  of  .... 

he  smote 

and 

its  wall 

he  destroyed 

and 

the  river  (?) 

from  its  midst 

he  turned  away 

(and) 


1  Have  we  perhaps  to  connect:   the  mighty  in  battle? 

1  Sign  REG  343. 

1  Perhaps  [. .  .]  nar-tim. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE  211 

The  beginning  of  Col.  4'  is  missing. 

Col.4'(2')    ..[ ] 

••-1 1 

[....[ ]  from  (?) 

5'  ti-a-a[m-tim]  the  lower 

sa-bil-t[im]  sea 

id-gi-e- zu-nu-ma  he    summoned    them 

and 

ba-ri-ti  between 

10'  URU+UDki  

u  and 

.  ...-na-ak"1  

i3-tu-|m/-ma  he ed  and 

15'  KAS-x  awaited 

u-ga-e  the  battle. 

na-ra-am-|dsin  Naram-Sin, 

da-num  the  mighty, 

20    iS-Wtf-su  heard  of  bint  (or  it) 

•i ....] 

The  lower  portion  of  the  column  is  missing. 
The  beginning  of  Col.  5'  is  missing. 
Col.  $'(i')  [. 


u-[ . . .  he j  ed 

[u]  and 


5'  sa-....[.... 
2a[  ] 

nar. .[ ]  the  river 

u-su-zi  he  turned  away 

10'  fc[ ]  and. . . . 

ma-. .[  Ma 

u  and 

1  Perhaps -na-ak-ki? 


212 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


isa[k] 
15'  [nibr]u[*] 


the  isakku 

of  Nippur, 


The  lower  portion  of  the  column  is  missing. 


REVERSE  (OR  OBVERSE?) 
The  upper  portion  of  Col.  i'  is  missing. 

Col.  .'(5')  I-... 


na[-ra-am-]|d[sin] 
5'  d[a-num] 
i[n  si-ip-ri\ 
d[innanna]1 

[: I 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 
The  upper  portion  of  Col.  2'  is  missing. 

Col.a'U')  [ ] 

i[s-tum -] 

3ar  in  [sar-ri] 
ma-na-ma 
5'  la  i-mu-ru 
i-nu 

na-ra-am-dsin 
da-nim2 
10'  in  si-ip-ri 


Naram-Sin 
the  mighty 

of  I  Star 


whom  (or  which) 

since  the  days  of  old 

no  king 

whatever 

had  seen, 

at  the  time  when 

Naram-Sin, 

the  mighty 


1  See  Col.  2'(4')  10',  11'- 

2  If  da-nim  be  not  merely  a  mistake,  naram-dsin,  etc.,  would  be  in  the  genitive.     Have  we 
perhaps  to  supply  an  a-na  before  na-ra-am-dsin,  which  would  be  dependent  on  i-Jja-ni-su  ("they 
bowed  before  him")?     Or  is  na-ra-am-dsin,  etc.,  dependent  on  J-nu  ("at  the  time  of  Naram-Sin")? 
If.'however,  Naram-Sin  is  the  subject  of  the  verb  GA-NAR,  da-nim  is  probably  a  mistake  for 
da-nGm. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS   OF    AGADt 


213 


innanna 
GA-NAR-  ma 
ki-ib-ra-t[um] 
15'  ar-ba-um 

i-ha-ni-|su-ma 
20'  im-hu-ru-|nim 
...[ 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 
The  upper  portion  of  Col.  3'  is  missing. 


of  IStar,1  . 

and 

the  four 

quarters  of  the  world 

as  one 

bowed  and 

received2 


Col.  3'        [  ] 

[gisTUKUL(  =  kag)-gi-su] 

his  weapons 

in  [ti-]a-am-tim 

he  washed 

sa-bil-tim 

in  the  lower 

5'  (N)I-LArJ 

sea. 

na-ra-am-  dsin 

Naram-Sin, 

da-num 

the  mighty 

in  si-ip-n 

10'  dinanna 

of  I  Star, 

i-nu 

when 

den-lil 

Enlil 

DI-KO(  =  dm)-su 

had  given 

i  5'  i-ti-nu-  ma 

his  judgment3 

u 

and         •  -jf» 

zi-ra-at 

had  given  ^1 

ni-si 

the  reins4  ' 

ga-ti-is5-su 

of  the  nations 

1  Have  we  perhaps  to  translate:  in  the  work  of  IStar  (i.  e.,  in  warfare)? 
1  If  the  broken  sign  of  the  following  line  is  LUGAL,  we  must  perhaps  translate:  "they 
went  before  the  king  ....."  or  possibly:  "they  accepted  him  as  king." 

3  /.  e.,  the  judgment  for,  or  in  favor  of,  Naram-Sin. 

4  Literally:  the  nose-rope,  i.  e.,  a  rope  fastened  to  a  ring  in  the  nose  of  an  animal  or  a  captive. 
See  for  this  explanation  Jensen,  Kosmologie  (Index)  and  KB  VI,  p.  341,  and  Thureau-Dangin. 
JA  1909,  p.  86  and  Restitution  materielle  de  la  stile  des  vautours,  p.  45,  note  6. 

6  Is  has  here  evidently  the  value  is;  cf.  note  4,  on  p.  174. 


214 


UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


20    i-ti-nu 

u 

na-e 

e-ir-tim 
25'  la  i-ti-  nu-sum 

I...].'.'.'.!"]..... 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 

The  upper  portion  of  Col.  4'  is  missing. 

Col.  4'(2')  [ ] 

[u] 

MU(  =  sum)  mi-me 

su-gu-un 

i-ga-pi-u 
5'  dinanna 

an-nu-ni-tum 

an 

den-lil 

zam-a-ma 
10'  dsin 

dsamas 

dne-unu-gal 

[d]u-mes 
15'  [d]nin-kara 

i-lu 

ra-bi-|u-tum 

in$U-NIGIN(  =  naphari) 
20'  ar-ra-dam  [-su-nu 

li-mu-ut-dam 

[l]i-ru-ru-u§ 

a-na 

[de]n-lil 

25'  I ]••[.•].. 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 


in  his  hand 

and 

had  not  given  him 

an 

adversary 


or 

says:  [(else) 

the  name  of  some  one 

place  (upon  it),1 

may  Inanna, 

the  Annunitu, 

Anu, 

Enlil, 

Zamama, 

Sin, 


Nirgal 

Umes 

Ninkara, 

the  great 

gods 

in  their  entirety 

curse  him 

with  a  bad 

curse. 

To 

Enlil 


'Or  perhaps:    "the  name  of  some  one  (else)  make  it"? 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF   AGADE 

The  upper  portion  of  Col.  5'  is  missing. 


215 


Col.  5'(i')  [(i)n-mu-u]s 


5'  [inKAS-]x(  =  tahazi) 
[a-ba-al-ga-m]a§ 

[VV  1 
sa]r 

[ba-ra-ah-si]kl 
[LAM+KUR)-ar 

10'  11 

si-id-ga-u 

[s]akanak-su 

[SU]-DO-A 

1  5'  [in]  b[a]-r[i]-t[i] 
[a-wa-ankl] 

M 

[su-si-imkl] 

i  .......  i 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 


RimuS, 

king 

of  KiS: 

in  a  battle 

he  defeated 

Abalgamas, 

the  king  of 

Barahsi, 

and 

Sidgau, 

his  sukallu 

his  hand  captured. 

Between 

Awan 

and 

Susa 


No.  37 

FRAGMENT  OF   COPY  OF    INSCRIPTIONS  OF   AN    EARLY    KING 

PROBABLY  NARAM-SIN 

The  beginning  of  the  column  is  missing. 


[d]a-num 

[VI  \ 
s]ar 

ki-ib-r]a-tim 
[ar-ba-i]m 

i ] 

The  rest  of  the  column  is  missing. 

VOL.  IV. 


mighty 

king 

of  the  four 

quarters  of  the  world, 


216  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

No.  38 
DATE  FORMULA  OF  SAR-GALI-SARRI 

mu  sar-ga-li-sar-ri  Year  after  Sar-gali- 

Sarri 

ki-gi-en^-sil1  to 

im-ta-e-da  

...-sag-ga 
5'  [m]u-us-bi  the  following  year. 

No.  39 
FRAGMENT  OF  VASE  INSCRIPTION  OF  DUDU 

[du-d]u  Dudu, 

[da-n]um  mighty 

[s]ar  king 

[a-ga-d]ekl  of  Agade. 

The  rest  of  the  inscription  is  missing. 

1  Probably  ki-2en-'gikl-5u  "to  Sumer." 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  AGADE  217 


THE  BEARING  OF  THE  NEW  INSCRIPTIONS  ON  THE 
HISTORY   OF  THE    KINGS  OF  AGADE 

SARRU-KIN 

The  tablet  published  as  No.  32  contains  copies  of  inscrip- 
tions of  Lugal-zaggisi,  king  of  Uruk,  and  Sarru-kin,  RimuS 
and  Manistusu,  kings  of  Agade  or  Kis,  set  up  in  the  temple 
Ekur  at  Nippur,  as  is  stated  in  the  colophon  on  the  left  edge. 
The  inscriptions  contain  important  historical  information,  the 
bearing  of  which  on  our  knowledge  of  that  remote  period  it 
is  the  purpose  of  the  following  sketches  to  set  forth. 

Sarru-kin  was  the  founder  of  the  kingdom  of  Agade  in 
Northern  Babylonia,  as  the  list  of  kings  published  by  Scheil 
in  1911  has  shown.  According  to  the  same  list  he  ruled  after 
Lugal-zaggisi,  king  of  Uruk  in  Southern  Babylonia,  who  had 
begun  his  brilliant  career  as  isakku  of  Umma,  and  for  twenty- 
four  years  had  ruled  over  Babylonia  and,  at  least  for  a  time 
it  seems,  over  the  surrounding  countries.  On  the  events  that 
brought  about  the  passing  of  the  kingdom  from  Uruk  to  Agade 
only  surmises  could  hitherto  be  ventured;  but  the  new  inscrip- 
tions of  Sarru-kin,  published  here,  give  us  the  information  that 
Lugal-zaggisi's  dominion  was  overthrown  by  Sarru-kin  in  a 
victorious  campaign  into  Southern  Babylonia,  in  the  course 
of  which  Lugal-zaggisi  himself  was  taken  captive  by  the 
Akkadians. 

Sarru-kin's  own  narrative  of  the  war  begins  with  the  state- 
ment that  he  conquered  Uruk,  the  capital  of  Lugal-zaggisi. 
From  the  wording  of  this  passage  it  appears  that  he  found 
little  or  no  resistance  when  he  marched  southward  and  took 
the  city,  which,  as  the  capital  of  Lugal-zaggisi's  kingdom,  no 
doubt,  was  strongly  fortified;  for  while  in  all  other  instances 
where  Sarru-kin  relates  the  conquest  of  a  city,  he  first  men- 
tions a  battle  with  the  forces  of  the  city,  here,  in  inscriptions 


218  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

a  and  b  at  least,  the  report  begins  immediately  with  the  state- 
ment that  he  "smote"  Uruk  and  destroyed  its  wall,  then  only 
proceeding  to  speak  of  two  battles,  one  against  the  "man  of 
Uruk,"  the  other  against  King  Lugal-zaggisi  himself.  We 
may,  therefore,  conclude  that  the  attack  came  as  a  surprise 
to  the  commander  or  commanders  of  the  city  and  province  of 
Uruk,  or  at  least  found  them  utterly  unprepared  and  unequal 
to  a  vigorous  resistance,  and  only  after  Sarru-kin  had  stormed 
the  city  do  they  seem  to  have  succeeded  in  gathering  sufficient 
forces  to  confront  the  invaders  in  a  pitched  battle,  which,  how- 
ever, as  the  inscription  tells  us,  ended  in  their  defeat.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  true,  inscription  h  mentions  the  battle  before 
the  capture  of  Uruk,  but  it  is  very  likely  that  the  scribe  who 
wrote  this  inscription  was  influenced  by  the  fact  that  in  the 
later  course  of  the  campaign  the  battle  invariably  took  place 
before  the  capture  of  a  city.  Inscription  h,  furthermore, 
informs  us  that  fifty  isakkus  were  defeated  in  this  first  battle. 
Where  the  battle  was  fought  is  not  stated,  though  it  must  have 
been  in  the  vicinity  of  Uruk  or  at  least  within  the  boundaries 
of  the  province,  because  otherwise  the  inscriptions  would  not 
mention  the  Urukites  alone  as  the  adversaries  of  Sarru-kin. 
However,  that  the  forces  of  Uruk  were  strongly  reinforced  by 
contingents  from  the  other  provinces  of  Lugal-zaggisi's  realm, 
is  evident  from  the  fact  just  mentioned  that  fifty  iSakkus  took 
part  in  the  battle,  since  it  can  hardly  be  assumed  that  this 
great  number  refers  to  princes  of  the  province  of  Uruk  alone, 
even  if  we  assume  that  most  of  them  ruled  over  small  towns 
only. 

Up  to  this  juncture  no  mention  is  made  of  King  Lugal- 
zaggisi  himself,  which  would  seem  to  indicate  that  he  was  not 
present  when  these  events  transpired.  To  defend  his  kingdom 
against  the  invaders  he  now  appears  himself  upon  the  scene 
with  an  army  which  we  may  suppose  he  had  hurriedly  assembled. 
The  second  of  the  battles  mentioned  above  then  takes  place, 
and  again  the  Northerners  are  victorious,  Lugal-zaggisi  him- 
self being  taken  prisoner. 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF  ACADE  219 

The  whole  territory  from  Agade  to  Uruk  along  the  river 
Euphrates,  which  then  took  its  course  farther  east  than  at  the 
present  time,  past  Ki3,  Nippur,  Kisurra  and  Surruppak,  t.  e., 
the  whole  northwestern  half  of  Southern  Babylonia,  was  now 
in  the  hands  of  Sarru-kin.  Of  Nippur,  which  is  situated  some- 
what less  than  half  way  between  Agade  and  Uruk,  this  is  proved 
by  Sarru-kin's  statement,  that  he  led  Lugal-zaggisi  in  fetters 
through  the  gate  of  Enlil,  i.  e.,  the  gate  of  the  temple  Ekur  at 
Nippur,  a  statement,  from  which,  at  the  same  time,  we  see 
that  Sarru-kin  took  care  to  seek  religious  sanction  for  his  sud- 
denly acquired  power;  for  Enlil,  as  the  god  of  lordship,  was 
regarded  by  the  Babylonians  as  the  primary  source  of  all  royal 
power  and  particularly  of  that  over  Babylonia,  and  for  this 
reason  Sarru-kin  was  obliged  to  seek  his  favor.  But  at  the 
same  time  it  was  a  great  triumph  for  Sarru-kin  himself,  when 
he  presented  the  once  mighty  ruler  as  a  prisoner  to  the  god. 
No  doubt  the  god  confirmed  Sarru-kin  through  the  mouth 
of  his  priests  as  the  legitimate  lord  of  Babylonia,  for  as  the 
titles  at  the  beginning  of  his  inscriptions  show,  either  then  or 
later  the  dignity  of  great  isakku  of  Enlil,  i.  e.,  chief  nomarch 
of  Enlil,1  was  conferred  upon  him,  the  same  title,  by  the  way, 
which  before  him  the  ill-fated  Lugal-zaggisi  had  borne  in  the 
days  of  his  power.2 

At  this  point  of  the  narrative  a  new  section  begins,  the 
transition  being  marked  by  a  repetition  of  Sarru-kin's  name 
and  title.  Perhaps  this  indicates  that  the  royal  historians 
divided  the  campaign,  by  which  Sarru-kin  made  m'mself  ruler 
over  Babylonia,  into  two  parts,  the  first  of  which  comprises 
the  conquest  of  the  northwestern  half  of  Southern  Babylonia 

1  !5a(g)-gal  den-lil,  Sarru-kin,  No.  34,  Col.  ho. 

An  isakku  is  an  hereditary  prince  inferior,  in  the  feudal  order  of  ranks,  only  to  the  king. 
having  his  residence  in  a  fortified  city  and  ruling  over  a  more  or  less  extensive  territory.  By 
calling  himself  the  iSakku  of  Enlil,  Sarru-kin  recognizes  the  god  as  his  king  to  whom  he  owes 
allegiance,  though  at  the  same  time  by  the  term  great  iSakku  he  implies  that  he  is  the  first  of  all 
vassals  of  the  god,  that  is,  of  all  other  kings. 

2  lSa(g)-gal  den-lil,   Lugal-zaggisi,  Vases,  Col.  iu,  «.     It  will   be  observed  that,  in  this 
title,  here  as  well  as  in  the  inscriptions  of  Surru-kin,  the  genitive  element  ak  is  entirely  dropped, 
while  in  all  other  instances  the  genitive  of  Enlil  is  enlilla;  cf,  e.  g.t  ka-den-lil-l4-5u  IM. 


I  .  . 

220  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

and  naturally  culminates  in  the  capture  of  King  Lugal-zaggisi 
as  the  most  important  event,  while  the  second  part  is  taken 
up  by  the  subjugation  of  the  other  half  of  Southern  Babylonia, 
where  the  isakkus  of  Lugal-zaggisi,  even  after  the  king's  capture, 
hoped  to  check  the  progress  of  the  invaders.  In  this  south- 
eastern half  our  inscriptions  clearly  distinguish  three  different 
territories,  namely,  that  of  Ur,  southeast  of  Uruk,  bordering 
on  the  edge  of  the  Arabian  desert;  secondly,  the  country  to 
the  east  of  Ur:  the  extensive  territory  of  E-Ninmar,  stretching 
from  the  city  of  LagaS  to  the  shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf;1  and 
lastly,  the  territory  of  Umma,  which  joined  that  of  E-Ninmar 
on  the  north. 

The  first  attack  of  Sarru-kin  in  this  second  half  of  the 
campaign  is  directed  against  the  province  of  Ur,  the  extreme 
southwestern  part  of  Southern  Babylonia.  The  city  of  Ur 
itself  was  situated  some  forty  miles  below  Uruk  in  the  vicin- 
ity of  the  Euphrates.  Taking  into  account  that  Sarru-kin 
began  his  campaign  by  an  attack  on  Uruk,  which  is  likewise 
situated  in  the  west,  it  seems  a  significant  fact  that  he  now 
begins  the  conquest  of  the  remaining  portions  of  Babylonia 
in  the  same  locality,  leaving,  for  the  time  being,  the  central 
part  of  Southern  Babylonia  in  the  hands  of  the  foe.  Perhaps 
he  was  prompted  to  this  procedure  by  the  fact  that  the 
Euphrates  afforded  a  convenient  means  of  drawing  resources 
from  the  North;  but  no  doubt  his  chief  reason  was  that  the 
central  part  of  Southern  Babylonia,  dominated  as  it  was  by 
Umma,  Lugal-zaggisi's  chief  stronghold,  presented  too  great  an 
obstacle  for  a  quick  conquest,  and  he  therefore  preferred  first 
to  do  away  with  the  fortresses  south  and  southeast  of  Umma 
and  then  only,  after  depriving  the  latter  of  the  possibility  of 
drawing  resources  from  the  other  parts  of  the  country,  to  turn 
upon  Umma  itself.  The  isakku  of  Ur,  or  whoever  it  was  that 
commanded  the  forces  of  the  province,  met  Sarru-kin  in  a  battle. 
He  was  defeated,  and  the  city  of  Ur  consequently  fell  and 
shared  the  fate  of  Uruk.  After  this  Sarru-kin  pushed  east- 

1  The  Persian  Gulf  at  that  time  reached  much  farther  inland  than  at  the  present. 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS   OF   AGADE  221 

ward  into  the  territory  of  E-Ninmar,  again  leaving  Umma 
unmolested.  Another  battle  was  fought  with  the  same  result; 
E-Ninmar  was  conquered  and  destroyed  and  the  whole  territory 
from  the  city  of  Lagas  to  the  shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  as  the 
inscription  expressly  states,  devastated.  Sarru-kin  himself 
approached  the  coast,  where  he  and  no  doubt  his  whole 
army  washed  their  weapons  in  the  waters  of  the  sea,  a 
ceremony  which  was  intended  to  hallow  the  weapons  for  the 
war  which  the  Babylonians  evidently  regarded  as  a  sacred 
enterprise. 

The  province  of  E-Ninmar  is  identical  with  the  territory 
over  which  in  former  times  the  isakkus  of  Lagas  had  ruled 
and  which  under  Urukagina,  shortly  before  Lugal-zaggisi 
made  himself  king  of  Babylonia,  had  formed  the  kingdom  of 
Lagas.  After  the  destruction  of  the  latter  city  by  Lugal- 
zaggisi,  Girsu  seems  to  have  become  the  capital,  Urukagina 
changing  his  title  to  "king  of  Girsu."1  Finally,  however,  when 
Urukagina  lost  his  kingdom  altogether,  it  appears  that  Lugal- 
zaggisi  made  E-Ninmar,  which  must  be  sought  somewhere 
south  of  Telloh,  the  chief  city  and  the  chief  stronghold  of  that 
region. 

After  having  taken  possession  of  the  provinces  north, 
west  and  southeast  of  Umma,  Sarru-kin  finally  turns  against 
Umma  itself.  This  city  was  then  ruled  by  the  isakku  Mes-£, 
as  we  see  from  inscription  a,  e,  which  served  as  subscription 
to  a  picture  of  the  isakku  on  the  monument  of  victory  set  up 
by  Sarru-kin.  The  fact  that  in  No.  34  the  inscription  referring 
to  Mes-£  is  placed  immediately  after  that  referring  to  Lugal- 
zaggisi  evidently  indicates  that  on  the  monument  the  isakku's 
picture  followed  that  of  King  Lugal-zaggisi  and  preceded  those 
of  the  isakkus  of  Uruk,  Ur  and  E-Ninmar,  if  the  latter  were 
represented  on  the  monument;  this  fact,  by  the  way,  is  a  further 

1  Cf.  Uru-kagina,  Clay  tablet,  Rev.  37, 8-  According  to  Cones  B  and  C,  Col.  31,  Uru-kagina 
had  fortified  the  city  of  Girsu  by  building  its  walls.  Whether  Cone  A,  in  which  Uru-kagina 
likewise  bears  the  title  "king  of  Girsu,"  has  to  be  placed  before  or  after  the  destruction  of  LagaS, 
we  do  not  yet  know. 


222  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

proof  .of  the  great  political  importance  attributed  by  us  to 
Umma.  Whether  this  Mes-£  was  perhaps  a  relative  of  Lugal- 
zaggisi  who  now  considered  himself  as  his  heir,  we  do  not  know; 
at  any  rate,  he  was  neither  a  son  nor  a  brother  of  the  king, 
since  this  fact  would  certainly  have  been  mentioned  in  the 
inscription.  When  the  king  of  Akkad  drew  near  with  his  vic- 
torious army,  the  fifth  and  last  battle  of  the  campaign  was 
fought.  Again  Sarru-kin  was  the  victor,  and  probably  imme- 
diately afterwards  he  took  Umma  and  destroyed  its  fortifica- 
tions. As  thus  the  last  resistance  was  broken,  Sarru-kin  was 
now  the  undisputed  lord  of  Babylonia. 

The  overthrow  of  Lugal-zaggisi  and  the  complete  conquest 
of  Southern  Babylonia  by  Sarru-kin  was  followed  by  the  subju- 
gation of  the  country  northwest  of  Babylonia.  In  the  in- 
scriptions 34  a  and  b,  which  we  have  followed  in  the  foregoing 
account,  this  fact  is  reported  in  the  short  statement  that  Enlil 
gave  unto  Sarru-kin  the  lands  "from  the  upper  sea  to  the 
lower  sea,"  *'.  e.,  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Persian  Gulf, 
the  Semitic  version  differing  somewhat  in  expression  from  the 
Sumerian,  inasmuch  as  it  says  that  Enlil  gave  or  subdued  unto 
Sarru-kin  "the  upper  and  the  lower  sea."  Two  other  parallel 
inscriptions,  c  and  d,  one  of  which  is  in  Sumerian,  the  other 
in  Akkadian,  are  somewhat  more  explicit,  stating  that  Enlil 
gave  to  Sarru-kin  the  "upper  land,"  and  then  specify  the  latter 
as  Mari,  larmuti  and  Ibla,  and  even  denote  the  extreme 
boundaries  to  which  Sarru-kin's  conquest  extended,  namely, 
the  "Cedar  Forest"  and  the  "Silver  Mountains."  Short  as  this 
statement  is,  nevertheless  it  is  of  very  great  importance  for 
our  knowledge  of  the  geography  of  Western  Asia  at  this  early 
period. 

Mari  is  well  known  as  the  name  of  a  city  on  the  Euphrates 
above  Babylonia,  though  its  exact  position  is  not  yet  deter- 
mined. Here  it  appears  as  a  designation  for  an  extensive 
territory,  evidently  comprising  the  Euphrates  Valley  from  the 
northwestern  boundaries  of  Babylonia  to  perhaps  the  vicinity 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE  223 

of  Karkemish.  The  use  of  the  name  of  the  city  as  a  geographical 
designation  is,  of  course,  due  to  the  fact  that  either  then  or 
in  former  times  this  territory  formed  a  political  state,  governed 
by  rulers  of  the  city  of  Mari.  In  fact,  the  existence  of  a  politi- 
cally important  kingdom  of  Mari  in  the  Sargonic  period  is 
sufficiently  proved  by  the  inscriptions.  On  a  statuette  a 

certain   [ ]-<>amas  calls    himself   lugal-ma-rikl   isa(g)-gal- 

den-lil,  the  last  a  title  which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  borne  by 
Lugal-zaggisi  as  well  as  by  Sarru-kin,  and  which,  it  would 
seem,  implied  the  possession  of  the  city  of  Nippur.1  Then  we 
recall  that  at  the  time  of  Eannadu2  Mari  appears  as  the  political 
equal  of  the  kingdom  or  kingdoms  of  KiS  and  Upi,  with  which 
it  is  allied  in  their  uprising  against  Eannadu.  Turning  to  a 
much  later  period  we  find  again  a  kingdom  or  principality  of 
Mari  towards  the  end  of  the  third  kingdom  of  Ur,  when  ISbi- 
Irra,  the  man  of  Mari,  as  he  is  called  on  an  unpublished  Nippur 
tablet,  invades  Babylonia  and  founds  the  kingdom  of  Isin. 
Still  later,  Hammurabi,  according  to  the  date  formula  of  his 
fourth  year,  wages  war  against  Mari  and  makes  it  defenseless 
by  destroying  its  wall;  here  Mari  is  possibly  again  the  political 
centre  of  the  middle  Euphrates  Valley. 

The  identification  of  the  two  other  lands  mentioned  as 
constituting  the  "upper  country"  is  at  the  present  to  a  great 
extent  dependent  on  the  correct  localization  of  the  "Cedar 
Forest"  and  the  "Silver  Mountains,"  which  Sarru-kin  mentions 
as  the  extreme  limits  of  the  territory  subdued  by  him.  In  one 
of  the  inscriptions  of  Gudea,3  the  ama-a-num,  i.  e.,  ,the  Amanus 
range,  is  defined  as  har-sag-erin  "cedar  mountains"  and  Gudea 
relates  that  he  procured  from  there  cedar  beams  sixty  and  fifty 
yards  in  length  as  well  as  another  kind  of  tree  only  twenty-five 
yards  in  length.  But  it  is  a  question  whether  these  cedar  moun- 
tains can  be  identified  with  the  gistir-erin-na  "Cedar  Forest"  of 

1  From  this  we  have  perhaps  to  conclude  that  Mari  is  one  of  the  missing  "cities  of  royalty" 
in  the  lists  of  kings.     But  see  p.  101. 
1  See  Chapter  V. 
8  Statue  B,  Col.  5*. 


224  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

which  Sarru-kin's  inscriptions  speak.  To  me  this  identification 
does  not  seem  to  be  very  likely;  for  since  the  Amanus  Mountains 
bar  the  way  to  the  Mediterranean  to  which  Sarru-kin  claims 
to  have  extended  his  empire,  and  which  itself,  according  to  the 
Akkadian  version,  he  claims  to  have  included  in  his  dominion, 
Amanus  could  not  very  well  be  mentioned  as  one  of  the  remotest 
points  of  his  empire.  Thus  possibly  the  cedar  forest  has  to  be 
sought  further  south,  as  far  south  perhaps  as  Lebanon  and 
Antilebanon. 

It  may  here  be  recalled  that  a  cedar  forest1  is  mentioned 
in  the  Gilgames  epic  as  the  abode  of  the  god  Humbaba,  to 
fight  with  whom  Gilgames  and  Enkidu  set  out  from  Uruk. 
As  this  forest,  as  well  as  that  in  the  inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin, 
is  mentioned  without  any  other  specification,  evidently  being 
understood  to  be  the  well-known  cedar  forest,  it  would  be  very 
tempting  to  see  in  both  the  same  locality.  The  cedar  forest 
of  the  Gilgames  epic  is  usually  sought  in  Elam,  though  on  no 
better  ground  than  because  the  name  Humbaba  is  considered 
to  be  compounded  with  the  name  of  the  Elamite  god  Humba 
or  Umba,2  an  assumption  which  neither  can  be  proved  nor  is 
very  likely,3  so  that  indeed  there  would  be  no  obstacle  to  the 
identification  of  the  two  forests;  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  no 
conclusive  proof  in  favor  of  the  identification.4 

The  "Silver  Mountains,"  on  the  other  hand,  are  in  all 
likelihood  the  Taurus  Mountains,  where,  as  we  know,  silver 
mines  were  worked  in  antiquity.  Note,  e.  g.,  that  Sulmanu- 
asarid  II  states  that  he  went  to  Mount  Tunni,  the  silver 

1  Written  gtsTIR-BlsERIN,  Gilg.  Ep.  IV  a«;  bw. 

2  See  Jensen  in  KB  VI  a  p.  437.     Whether  the  KUR-glsERlNkl  mentioned  in  2  R  5O65  is 
identical  with  our  Kl8TIR-elsERIN  and  whether  it  really  was  situated  to  the  east  of  Babylonia, 
is  equally  doubtful,  although  5  R  50  mentions  the  mountain  between  Gutium  and  Marjialim. 

3  Equally  unfounded,  at  least  in  view  of  our  present  evidence,  is  the  identification  of  rjum- 
baba  with  KOfi/?a/Jos.  who  appears  as  the  guardian  of  Queen  Stratonike  in  the  legend  concerning 
the  construction  of  the  sanctuary  at  Hierapolis  reported  by  Lucian  in  De  dea  syria. 

4  Note,  however,  that  the  sadu-u  el§ERIN,  the  mu-sab  ilipl,  parak  dir-NI-NI,  in  front  of  which 
the  cedar  is  standing,  V  i6;',  occurs  in  a  passage  which  clearly  betrays  the  hand  of  a  redactor; 
for  sadu  and  glserinu  in  1.  6  seem  to  be  variants  as  well  as  mu-sab  ilipl  and  parak  dir-NI-Nl,  so 
that  we  may  have  to  reckon  with  a  combination  of  different  traditions  which  very  well  may 
have  located  the  cedar  forest  or  cedar  mountain  at  different  localities. 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS   OF   AGADE  225 

mountain,  on  an  expedition  to  Kue  and  Tabal.1  These  mines 
probably  formed  one  of  the  chief  objectives  of  Sarru-kin's 
campaign;  note  that  ManiStusu  in  Col.  2662.M  likewise  mentions 
mines  as  the  extreme  limit  of  his  conquests  in  the  country  "be- 
yond the  sea." 

The  country  of  Jarmuti  is  known  to  us  from  the  Tell- 
Amarna  letters  as  mfttuia-ri-mu-ta  and  m4tuia-ri-im-mu-ta.  It  is 
mentioned  in  twelve  letters  of  Rib-Addi,  the  ruler  of  Gubla 
or  Byblos  on  the  Phoenician  coast,  in  which  he  implores  the 
king  of  Egypt  to  order  his  agent  Janhamu  to  send  grain  from 
Jarimuta  to  Gubla,  since  the  inhabitants  of  his  city  are  unable 
to  procure  it  themselves,  having  already  given  all  their  money, 
valuables  and  even  their  children  in  exchange  for  food  from 
that  country.  In  one  of  the  letters  Rib-Addi  refers  to  the 
advice  probably  given  him  by  the  royal  court  to  send  a  ship  to 
Jarimuta,  while  in  two  others  he  seems  to  protest  that  for 
certain  reasons  it  is  impossible  to  reach  Jarimuta  by  ship. 
From  these  latter  passages  it  follows  that  Jarimuta  was  situated  on 
the  shore  of  the  Mediterranean,  that  at  the  time  of  Amenophis 
IV  it  was  under  the  control  of  the  Egyptians,  and  lastly, 
that  it  could  produce  grain  in  sufficient  quantities  to  supply  the 
Phoenician  cities,  a  fact  which  necessarily  presupposes  that  it 
was  a  more  or  less  level  country.  For  these  reasons  it  has  been 
proposed  to  see  in  the  land  of  Jarimuta  the  Nile  delta,2  an 
identification  which  in  the  light  of  the  new  inscriptions  of 
Sarru-kin  is,  of  course,  entirely  out  of  question,  since  Jarimuta 
is  a  part  of  the  ''Upper  Land"  between  the  Cedar  Forest  and 
the  Silver  Mountains,  and  must  therefore  be  sought  somewhere 
along  the  Syrian  or  possibly  the  Cicilian  coast.  As  the  boundary 
of  the  Egyptian  sphere  of  influence  towards  the  North  during 
the  earlier  part  of  the  reign  of  Amenophis  IV  was  approximately 

1  Black  obelisk   104-107;    statue  (Messerschmidt,    Keilschrifttexte  aus    Assur  1   No    30) 
Rev.  2-4.     See  Meissner,  OLZ  1912,  Cols.  145-149  (Woher  haben  die  Assyrer  Silber  bezogen?). 

2  Niebuhr,  Das  Land  Jarimuta.     MVG  I,  p.  208  ff;  his  view  was  approved  of  by  W.  M. 
Miiller.  ibid.,  II,  p.  274;  H.  Ranke,  KMAaV,  p.  22  and  note  i,  and  lastly  adopted  by  O.  Web«r 
in  Knudtzon,  Die  Tell-Amarna-Briefe,  p.  1153. 


226  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

the  Amanus,  we  may  very  well  assume  that  the  Jarimuta  of  the 
Tell-Amarna  letters  was  the  plain  of  Antioch  along  the  lower 
course  and  at  the  mouth  of  the  Orontes  river.  This  fertile 
region  must  have  been  considered  by  the  Egyptians  as  one  of 
the  most  valuable  of  their  Asiatic  possessions  and  doubtless 
for  this  reason  stood  directly  under  an  Egyptian  rabisu,  namely, 
Janhamu  who  is  so  frequently  mentioned  in  the  Tell-Amarna 
letters.  The  fact  that  we  hear  comparatively  little  of  this 
region  in  the  Tell-Amarna  letters,  cannot  be  cited  as  an  argu- 
ment against  this  assumption,  since  the  correspondence  between 
the  Egyptian  governor  and  the  court,  of  course,  was  carried  on 
in  Egyptian  and,  therefore,  probably  was  written  on  a  material 
that  long  since  has  perished. 

While  at  the  time  of  the  Tell-Amarna  letters  the  land  of 
Jarimuta,  as  far  as  we  know,  comprised  a  rather  restricted 
area,  at  the  time  of  Sarru-kin,  Jarmuti  was  the  geographical 
name  for  an  extensive  territory,  evidently  comprising  the  whole 
country  from,  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Euphrates  where  it 
bordered  on  the  territory  of  Mari.  In  both  the  Sumerian  and 
Akkadian  versions  of  our  inscriptions  Jarmuti  is  supplied  with 
the  determinative  ki,  and  it  is  therefore  likely  that  it  was  called 
after  a  city  of  this  name.  This  fact,  if  correct,  would  of  course 
indicate  the  existence  in  those  regions  at  some  very  early  time 
of  a  powerful  kingdom  of  Jarmuti  the  kings  of  which  resided 
in  this  city. 

The  important  question  as  to  the  relation  in  which  the 
country  of  Jarmuti  stood  to  the  country  or  people  of  Martu 
which  we  meet  for  the  first  time  in  a  date  formula  of  Sar-gali- 
sarri,  the  sixth  king  of  Agade,  cannot  yet  be  definitely  answered. 
Sar-gali-Sarri  lived  more  than  one  hundred  years  after  the 
beginning  of  Sarru-kin's  reign,  and  we  cannot,  therefore,  be 
sure  whether  the  Martu  country  was  of  any  significance  at 
the  time  of  Sarru-kin.  Nevertheless,  considering  the  extent 
of  the  country  of  the  Amurru  with  which  Martu  was  equated 
in  later  times,  it  may  be  regarded  as  very  well  possible  that 
Martu  even  at  this  early  period  designated  Syria  and  Palestine 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS   OF   AGADE  227 

south  of  the  northern  ends  of  Lebanon  and  Antilebanon,  while 
Jarmuti  designated  Syria  to  the  north  of  these  limits  as  far  as 
perhaps  the  northern  slopes  of  the  Amanus  range. 

If  the  identification  of  Jarmuti  is  correct,  then  the  country 
of  Ibla,  which  is  mentioned  as  the  third  region  of  the  "upper 
country,"  must  necessarily  be  situated  north  of  Jarmuti,  com- 
prising the  southern  slopes  and  offshoots  of  the  Taurus  Moun- 
tains and  probably  stretching  eastwards  into  the  bend  which 
the  Euphrates  describes  around  the  later  Commagene  and 
Melitene.  That  the  country  was  mountainous  is  shown  by  the 
above-mentioned  inscription  of  Gudea  who  speaks  of  a  certain 
URU-ur-sukl  as  a  mountain  district  of  Ibla  from  whence  he 
procured  all  kinds  of  mountain  trees,  such  as  zabalum,  u-ku- 
gal-gal,  tulubum,  etc.1  At  our  own  period  Ibla  is  mentioned 
in  an  inscription  of  Naram-Sin,'-  who  there  styles  himself 
the  smiter  of  Armanum  and  Ibla,3  a  juxtaposition  from  which 
we  must  conclude  that  Ibla  and  Armanum  were  neighboring 
countries,  the  former  perhaps  comprising  the  southern  slopes 
of  the  Taurus  chain  west  of  the  Euphrates,  the  latter  probably 
stretching  from  the  Euphrates  towards  Assyria. 

That  the  "upper  land"  has  to  be  understood  as  a  collective 
name  for  the  western  regions  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  in 
inscriptions  c  and  d  it  is  not  mentioned  together  with  the 
countries  of  Mari,  Jarmuti  and  Ibla,  but  is  separated  from  them 
by  the  verb  itisum,  these  latter  countries,  therefore,  merely 
constituting  the  "upper  land."  The  term  has,  of  course,  arisen 
from  the  fact  that  Syria  is  reached  from  Babylonia  by  going 
up  the  Euphrates;  note  that  for  the  same  reason  the  west  or 
rather  northwest  is  often  referred  to  as  igi-nim  "above,"  while 
the  regions  southeast  of  Babylonia  are  spoken  of  as  si(g)  "below,'N 

1  Statue  B,  Col.  553-62. 

'Published  by  H.  de  Genouillac  in  RA  10,  p.  101,  No.  i;  the  same  inscription  is  found 
on  a  perforated  plaque  from  Telloh  (Thureau-Dangin,  CR  1899,  p.  348;  SAKI,  p.  i66d),  but  here 
the  last  line  ib-lakl  is  broken  off. 

"SAG-GIS'-RA  8ar-ma-nimkl  »u  10ib-lakl. 

4  Cf.  7s!-Su  elam-ma  ba-Si-gub-bu [ ]  "nim-Sti  foa-al-ma  lu-kur-ra-ge[ 

HOT  20  Rev.;  mu  ur-dengur  lugal-e  st-ta  igi-nim-SO  gfr  si-bf-sa,  date  of  Ur-engur.  RTC 
261-263. 


228  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

and   that   the   Mediterranean   is   called   the   "upper  sea,"   the 
Persian  Gulf  the  "lower  sea."1 

The  account  of  the  subjugation  of  the  "upper  land"  in 
inscriptions  a  and  b  is  preceded  by  the  statement  that  Enlil 
gave  no  foe  or,  as  one  inscription  has  it,  no  rival  to  Sarru-kin, 
and  the  same  statement  is  added  at  the  same  point  of  the  narra- 
tive in  inscriptions  c  and  d.  The  position  of  this  statement 
is  by  no  means  accidental;  it  was  only  on  this  expedition  or 
perhaps  expeditions  to  the  West  that  Sarru-kin  encountered 
no  serious  opposition,  whereas  in  the  previous  war  against 
Lugal-zaggisi  and  the  South  Babylonian  isakkus  five  battles 
had  to  be  fought  before  the  last  resistance  was  broken.  From 
this  point  of  view  it  is  significant  that  Sarru-kin  himself  does 
not  allude  to  any  battle  during  this  expedition,  nor  does  he 
claim  to  have  devastated  the  western  countries.  We  may 
therefore  imagine  that  Sarru-kin  set  out  for  the  West  with  an 
enormous  army  and  that,  wherever  he  appeared,  the  cities 
and  local  princes,  seeing  that  resistance  would  be  fatal,  as  a 
rule,  submitted  to  his  demands  of  tribute  and  hostages,  which 
probably  were  very  excessive.  That  Sarru-kin  brought  home 
an  enormous  spoil  we  may  conclude  from  the  grandeur  of  his 
royal  household  of  which  he  speaks  immediately  after  the 
account  of  the  subjugation  of  the  West,  and  the  costs  of  which 
he  evidently  defrayed  with  the  tribute  of  the  foreign  countries. 
As  an  illustration  of  the  splendor  with  which  he  surrounded 
himself  he  mentions  in  inscriptions  c  and  d  that  daily  5400 
men  eat  bread  before  him,  while  in  inscriptions  a  and  b  he 
boasts  that  princes  or  nobles  of  the  foreign  nations  stand  in 
attendance  before  him. 

In  inscriptions  a  and  b  the  section  containing  this  allu- 
sion to  the  foreign  nobles  is  immediately  followed  by  the  account 
of  the  restoration  of  the  city  of  Kis  which  evidently  had  lain 

1  Cf.  a-ab-ba-igi-nim-ta  a-ab-ba-si-ga-su,  Gudea,  Statue  B  525.  26,'  3Q-ba4  a-ab-ba  8st- 
ga(?)-ta  6idigna  buranun-bi  8a-ab-ba  9igi-nim-ma-su  10g}r-bi  si-e-na-sa,  Lugal-zaggisi,  vase 
inscription  Col.  2. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS   OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE  229 

in  ruins  since  the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Ki§  by  Lugal- 
zaggisi.1  Sarru-kin,  however,  did  not  make  KiS  his  residence, 
but,  as  the  following  partially  broken  inscription  e  stated,  built 
an  entirely  new  residence,  or,  as  he  says,  a  city,  within  the 
marches  of  Agade.  It  is  from  this  city  that  he  derived  his 
title  "king  of  Agade."  But  evidently  in  order  to  establish  a 
connection  with  the  past  history  of  Babylonia  and  thus  to 
legitimate  his  new  kingdom,  he  also  adopts  in  his  official  list 
of  titles  that  of  "king  of  KiS"  and  "king  of  the  land,"  the  former 
of  which  implied  chiefly  the  dominion  over  Northern  Baby- 
lonia, while  the  title  lugal-kalam-ma  "king  of  the  land,"  as 
we  have  seen  in  Chapter  IV,  denoted  sovereignty  over  the 
South.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  sequence  of  the  titles  is  "king 
of  Agade,"  "king  of  Kis,"  "king  of  the  land,"  and  that  the 
second  of  these,  "king  of  Kis,"  is  preceded  by  the  theological 
title  "vicegerent  of  Innanna,"  the  chief  deity  of  Kis,  while  the 
title  "king  of  the  land"  is  preceded  by  the  title  "paSiSu  of 
Anum,"  the  god  of  Uruk.  No  theological  predicate  is  con- 
nected with  the  title  "king  of  Agade,"  because  none  of  the 
great  ruler-gods  had  his  seat  there,  the  city  enjoying,  as  we 
see  from  the  summaries  in  our  new  lists  of  kings,  for  the  first 
time  the  privilege  of  being  the  capital  of  Babylonia.2  On  the 
other  hand,  the  theological  predicate  "great-isakku  of  Enlil," 
is  not  followed  by  any  political  title,  because  in  the  past,  at 
least  in  historical  times,  Nippur  had  had  only  religious  or  theo- 
logical importance  as  the  seat  of  the  supreme  god  of  lordship. 
It  may  perhaps  seem  strange  at  first  thought  that  the  god 
Zamama  of  Kis  does  not  appear  in  the  titles  of  Sarru-kin,  but 
this  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  at  the  time  of  the  founding  of 
the  kingdom  of  Agade,  Zamama  was  a  god  of  minor  impor- 
tance, or  at  least,  was  not  reckoned  as  one  of  the  great  ruler- 
gods.  This  is  clearly  shown  by  the  fact  that  he  was  the  ilu, 

1  The  assumption  that   Lugal-zaggisi  himself  made  an  end  to  the  kingdom  of  Ki5  is.  of 
course,  at  the  present  only  a  conjecture. 

2Cf.  No.  2  Col.  123, 4:  a-du-i-kam  Sa  a-ga-dekl. 


230  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

i.  e.,  the  patron  or  tutelary  god  of  Sarru-kin,1  ranking  as  such 
perhaps  with  the  goddess  Nidaba,  the  tutelary  goddess  of 
Lugal-zaggisi,  or  with  the  god  Nin-subur,  the  god  of  King 
Urukagina  of  Lagas,2  but  not  with  deities  like  Enlil  and  Innanna, 
to  whom  the  king,  as  a  rule,  would  refer  as  "his  lord"  or  "his 
lady,"  not  as  "his  god"  or  "his  goddess."  The  very  fact, 
however,  that  Zamama  was  the  patron  god  of  King  Sarru-kin, 
it  seems,  gave  occasion  to  his  elevation  to  the  rank  of  chief  god 
of  Kis,  as  which  he  appears,  e.  g.,  at  the  time  of  the  first  dynasty, 
being  at  that  time  mentioned  before  his  spouse  Innanna  of 
Kis  wherever  the  two  are  named  together.3  This  elevation  can 
already  be  noted  under  Naram-Sin,  for  in  the  fourth  column 
of  inscription  No.  34,  Rev.  Col.  4^,  he  is  enumerated  as  one 
of  ten  gods  whom  Naram-Sin  expressly  designates  as  i-lu 
ra-bi-u-tum  "the  great  gods,"  ranking  as  fifth  immediately 
after  Enlil. 

The  site  of  the  city  of  Agade  has  usually  been  sought  in 
the  vicinity  of  Sippar,  though  for  no  sufficient  reason.  The 
statement  of  the  legend  that  Sarru-kin  was  exposed  on  the 
Euphrates  and  was  carried  by  the  water  to  the  abode  of  Akki, 
proves  that  Agade  was  situated  either  on  the  Euphrates,  or 
on  a  canal  which  derived  its  waters  from  this  river.  The  legend, 
the  chronicle  and  the  omens,  the  list  of  kings,  published  by 
Scheil,  as  well  as  the  inscriptions,  all  bring  Sarru-kin  in  close 
connection  with  I  star  or  Zamama,  which  seems  to  indicate 
that  Agade  was  situated  in  the  vicinity  of  Kis.  If  this  con- 
jecture should  prove  correct,  an  entirely  new  light  might  be 
thrown  on  the  difficult  passage  in  the  chronicle  where  it  is 
stated  that  Sarru-kin  "tore  out  the  soil  of  the  ese  of  Babylon," 
and  "built  the  ite  of  Agade  in  view  of  Babylon,"  for  the  remov- 

1  Cf.  zam-a-mil  il-su;  notice' the  writing  of  il  with  the  sign  il,  which  is  characteristic  for  this 
period.     For  the  reading  zam-a-ma,  see  OLZ  1912,  Col.  484.     For  the  writing    za-ma-mi  at  our 
period  see  e.  g.,  SANGU-dza-m^-ma,  Manistusu,  Obelisk  A  82o,  and  the  name  KA+§U-§A- 
dza-ma-ma,  ibid.,  B  4e,  beside  SANGU-AN-a-ma,  B^. 

2  Cf.  Urukagina,  stone  tablet  410,  51  dingir-ra-ni  dni-s"ubur-ge. 

3Cf.,  e.   g.,    1G1    +    £-nir   ki-dur-mah  dza-ma-ma  dinnanna,  date   of    the  36th   year  .of 
Hammu-rabi. 


A.    POEBF.L — INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  ACADE  231 

ing  of  the  soil  to  a  nearby  city  would  be  entirely  within  the 
limits  of  possibility.  However,  the  variant  readings  of  the 
omens  show  that  the  text  is  too  uncertain  for  the  deduction 
of  any  trustworthy  conclusion  on  this  point.  Of  much  more 
weight,  however,  is  the  fact  that  in  the  obelisk  of  ManiStusu 
as  witnesses  for  purchases  of  land,  there  appear  chiefly  m2r£ 
agaric1"  and  mare  kiSi1",  thus  showing  again  the  close  connection 
between  Kis  and  Agade. 

It  is  of  great  interest  to  notice  that  the  Sumerian  and 
Akkadian  inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin  give  different  forms  for  the 
name  of  the  capital,  inasmuch  as  the  former  write  ag-gi-de**, 
while  in  the  latter  we  find  the  well-known  writing  a-ga-de"". 
These  variants  show  unmistakably  that  even  at  the  time  of 
Sarru-kin  the  original  meaning  of  the  name  was  unknown. 
Both  a-ga-dekl  and  ag-gi-dekl  are  purely  phonetic  renderings 
of  the  name.  The  doubling  of  the  g  corresponds  to  the  well- 
known  spelling  of  the  name  with  kk,  namely,  as  Akkad,  at  a 
later  period,  the  g  instead  of  the  later  k  being,  as  the  inscrip- 
tions show,  a  common  orthographic  peculiarity  of  this  early 
period.1 

A  popular  etymology  of  the  city's  name,  however,  is  per- 
haps transmitted  to  us  in  the  name  of  Akki,  who  was  Sarru- 
kin's  foster-father  according  to  the  legend;  for  aqqi  means 
"I  poured  out  (water),"  and  might  here  be  an  epithetic  name 
referring  to  the  vocation  of  Akki  who  was  a  naq  mepl,  a  "pourer 
of  water."  In  Sumerian,  on  the  other  hand,  a-gade  means 
"I  will  pour  water."  Perhaps  there  existed  an  aetiological 
legend  concerning  the  name  of  Agade,  explaining  it  as  the  abode 
of  a  man  who  once  on  a  certain  occasion  said  the  words:  "I 
poured  out  water,"  or  "1  will  pour  out  water,"  and  thus 
gave  the  place  its  name. 

The  inscriptions  contained  in  Columns  i-n  of  text  32 
form  a  well-defined  group,  treating  of  the  events  with  which 

1  See  also  my  remarks  in  OLZ,  Col.  485. 
VOL.  IV. 


232  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

we  have  hitherto  been  occupied.  All  these  inscriptions  were 
evidently  composed  after  the  subjugation  of  the  West  and 
before  the  conquest  of  Elam  which  forms  the  subject  of  a  second 
group  of  inscriptions,  beginning  at  the  end  of  Column  1 1 .  Ac- 
cording to  the  colophons  of  the  copyist,  the  texts  were  copied 
from  inscriptions  on  "images" — alan — and  stone  slabs — ki-gal— 
which  formed  the  pedestals  or  bases  of  the  images,  as  well 
as  from  inscriptions  on  other  votive  objects.  Some  of  the 
"images"  were  probably  sculptures  in  the  round;  others, 
however,  were  doubtless  of  the  type  of  the  stelae  of  victory, 
namely,  slabs  or  blocks  of  stone  with  pictorial  representations 
in  relief.1  Besides  the  figure  of  the  king,  which,  of  course,  was 
never  omitted,  these  monuments  contained  representations  of 
the  conquered  kings  and  commanders  and  of  the  spoil  or  tribute 
of  the  conquered  cities,  as  we  may  infer  from  the  many  short 
inscriptions  containing  only  the  names  and  titles  of  these  foreign 
officials  or  reading  "tribute  of  Ansan"  and  the  like,  inscrip- 
tions which  no  doubt  served  to  explain  the  sculptures.  E.  g., 
on  the  monument  from  which  inscription  b  was  copied,  which 
described  Sarru-kin's  war  against  Lugal-zaggisi,  the  latter 
king  and  the  iSakku  of  Umma  were  pictured,  evidently  in  the 
posture  of  the  vanquished,  with  bound  hands,  kneeling  or 
prostrated  before  Sarru-kin.  Long  rows  of  subjected  foreign 
officials  and  tribute-bearing  citizens  must  have  been  engraved 
on  monument  k  which  belongs  to  a  later  period  of  Sarru-kin's 
reign.  Inscription  b,  on  the  other  hand,  was  copied  from  a 
statue  which  Lugal-zaggisi  had  set  up  for  himself  and  which 
Sarru-kin  did  not  remove,  allowing  it  to  be,  by  its  contrast 
with  the  present,  an  eloquent  witness  of  his  own  success. 

Our  new  inscriptions,  by  the  way,  thus  reveal  the  important 
fact  that  the  interior  of  the  temple  of  Enlil  at  Nippur  contained 
a  considerable  number  of  sculptured  works  such  as  described 
above,  and  there  is  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  as  soon  as  the 
main  building  of  the  temple,  which  contains  the  sanctuary  of 
Enlil,  and  which  has  received  but  slight  attention  from  the 

1  Cf.  the  monument  of  Sarru-kin  found  at  Susa  and  described  by  Gautier  in  RT  27,  p.  176  ff. 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF   KINGS  OF   AGADE  233 

four  expeditions  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  is  excavated, 
many  of  these  ancient  works  of  art  will  be  recovered.  The 
proof  for  this  assertion  may  be  seen  in  the  fragment  of  an  original 
diorite  stela  of  King  ManiStusu,  published  as  No.  35  of  this 
volume,  the  inscription  of  which  is  found  almost  complete  in 
Columns  26  and  27  of  our  tablet.  The  fragment  contains  only 
five  lines  or  panels,  while  the  original  monument  comprised  about 
sixty-three  lines,  a  fact  which,  taken  together  with  the  huge  size 
of  the  signs,  clearly  indicates  the  monumental  character  of  the 
original  stela. 

As  to  the  second  group  of  inscriptions  which  begins  with 
Column  1 1  below,  and  which  deals  with  Sarru-kin's  conquest 
of  the  countries  of  Elam  and  Barahsi,  unfortunately  those  parts 
containing  the  detailed  narrative  of  the  conquest  itself  are 
missing,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  words  in  Column  13.  In 
an  inscription  copied  from  the  pedestal  of  a  statue,1  however, 
Sarru-kin  is  given  the  epithet  "smiter  of  Elam  and  Barahsi," 
and,  moreover,  Column  n  and  Column  i22  give  us  the  short 
explanatory  inscriptions  which  were  added  to  sculptured  reliefs 
representing  the  vanquished  high  dignitaries  of  Elam  and 
Barahsi  and  the  booty  or  tribute  of  the  cities  of  these  two 
countries,  so  that  at  least  the  fact  of  the  conquest  of  Elam 
and  Barahsi  by  Sarru-kin  can  be  established  beyond  any  doubt. 

Elam  and  Barahsi  must  be  neighboring  countries,  since 
they  are  mentioned  side  by  side  not  only  here  but  also  in  the 
inscriptions  of  Rimus.  From  the  statement  of  RimuS  that  he 
tore  out  the  foundations  of  Barahsi  from  the  nations  of  Elam,3 
it  follows  that  the  name  of  the  latter  might  be  used  so  as  to 
include  the  former,  as  indeed  Elam  in  a  comprehensive  sense 
could  denote  the  whole  country  east  and  southeast  of  Baby- 
lonia, including  Ansan,  Sirihum,  Kimas'  and  ZabSali.4  But  in 

1  Inscription  i,  (3. 

2  Inscriptions  i,  y-i/'. 

3  See  inscription  u. 
<Cf.  HGT20  Rev.  7. 


234  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

a  restricted  sense  Elam  is  only  a  part  of  this  territory,  namely, 
the  region  around  Susa,  and  as  such  ranking  in  the  same  category 
as  those  other  countries;  cf.,  e.  g.,  the  enumeration  Ansan, 
Elam,  Simas  and  Barahsi  in  the  inscription  of  Anu-mutabil. 
So  also  are  mentioned  in  the  inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin  side  by 
side,  among  the  vanquished  dignitaries,  Sanamsimu,  the  saka- 
nakku  of  Elam,  and  Sidgau,  the  sakanakku  of  Barahsi.  The 
exact  geographical  relation  of  Elam  and  Barahsi  to  each  other, 
however,  has  not  yet  been  determined,  but  it  seems  that  the 
latter  was  the  more  remote  from  Babylonia,  since  Elam,  probably 
because  it  was  nearer  to  Babylonia,  is  mentioned  before  Barafesi. 
Towards  the  southeast  then  were  situated  the  neighboring 
countries  of  Ansan  and  Sirihum  which  have  to  be  sought  at 
no  great  distance  from  the  shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  because 
ManiStusu,  as  we  shall  see,  crosses  the  Persian  Gulf  and  sub- 
jugates the  Arabian 'shores  after  having  devastated  these  two 
countries.  AnSan,  at  least,  can  be  definitely  identified  with 
the  later  province  Persis,  since  in  the  Nabuna'id-Cyrus  chronicle, 
Cyrus,  at  the  time  when  he  was  still  the  vassal  of  Astyages,  is 
called  king  of  AnSan;1  likewise  Nabunaid,  in  his  great  cylinder 
inscription  from  Abu-Habba,  designates  him  as  king  of  Anzan,2 
which  is,  of  course,  identical  with  Ansan;  and  lastly,  Cyrus 
himself  in  his  cylinder  inscription  gives  himself  as  well  as  his 
forefathers  the  title  king  of  Ansan.3 

The  country  of  Sirihum  then  evidently  comprised  the 
southern  part  of  Carmania,  /.  e.,  the  country  near  the  straits  of 
Oman,  where  Manistusu  crossed  over  to  Arabia;  note  the 
sequence  Ansan  and  Sirihum  from  which,  no  doubt,  it  follows 
that  the  latter  was  the  more  remote  from  Babylonia.4 

1  Col.  2i :  ku-ras  Sar  an-ia-an. 

*  Col.  129:  ku-ra-as  sar  matlan-za-an. 

*Cf.  1.  12:  Iku-ra-as  iar  !an-3a-an;  1.  21:  mar  Ika-am-bu-zi-ia  §ar  alan-sa-an 

mar-mSn  Jku-ra-a§  Sar  alan-sa-an  LIB-BAL-BAL  Ili-is-pi-i5 iar  alan-Sa-an. 

4  Winckler  in  MVG  1896,  p.  71  f.  erroneously  defines  Anzan  as  lying  north  of  Elam,  east 
of  Suri  (=  Subari),  south  of  the  Manda  and  west  of  Gutium,  while  in  KAT2,  pp.  28,  100,  etc., 
he  identifies  it  with  Media,  and  in  the  map  makes  it  comprise  the  Zagros  mountains.  Ed.  Meyer 
in  Geschichte  des  Altertums  I2  p.  408,  thinks  that  it  is  that  part  of  Elam  in  which  Susa  is  situated, 
which,  however,  is  disproved  by  the  passages  mentioned  above.  The  position  of  Anian  is  cor- 
rectly recognized  by  Jensen  in  ZA  15,  p.  225  ff. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   A<,\l>l 


233 


Unfortunately,  Columns  13-15,  which  contained  further 
inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin,  are  destroyed.  The  few  preserved 
lines  of  Column  1 3  refer  to  a  battle  and  a  victory  over  thirty 
iSakkus,  the  last  of  the  preserved  lines  mentioning  "rebellious 
cities."1  In  Column  17,  the  second  of  the  reverse,  we  have 
already  an  inscription  of  RimuS,  but  the  short  inscriptions  in 
Column  1 6  were  doubtless  copied  from  a  monument  of  Sarru- 
kin,  because  the  series  of  pictorial  representations  from  which 
they  were  taken  presupposes  a  longer  main  inscription,  which 
would  necessarily  extend  to  the  preceding  column  where  Sarru- 
kin  is  mentioned.  Among  the  vanquished  foes  in  these  reliefs 
there  reappear  at  least  two  of  the  persons  already  mentioned 
in  Column  12,  namely,  Sidgau,  the  sakanakku  of  Barahsi,  and 
Kumduba,  the  judge  of  Barahsi.  Nevertheless,  this  second 
group  of  reliefs  cannot  refer  to  the  same  events  described  in 
the  group  of  inscriptions  i  and  k,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  follow- 
ing comparison  of  the  short  legends  originally  engraved  under 
the  sculptures  in  the  two  groups. 


Inscription  i,  y-i/». 

Ur, 

(after  at  least  25  lines) 
Dagu,  brother  of  the  king 

of  Barahsi 
Tribute  of  HE-NI 
Tribute  of  B unban 

Zina,  isakku  of  Hu 

Hidarida,  isakku  of  Guw/laha 

Tribute  of  Saba 

Tribute  of  Awan 

Sidgau,  sakanakku  of  Barahsi 


Kumduba,  judge  of  Barahsi 
Tribute  of  Susa 


Inscription  m,  rj-\. 

1 

ru,  isakku  of  Siribum. 


Sidgau,  sakanakku  of  Barahsi. 
Sanamsimu,  iSakku  of  Elam. 
Lub*s-AN,  son  of  the  king  of  Elam. 
Kumduba,  judge  of  Barafosi. 


The  fact  that  in  the  first  of  the  two  lists  Dagu,  the  brother 
of  the  king  of  Barahsi,  is  mentioned  among  the  vanquished  or 


1  URU-URU  za-ar-ru-tim. 


236  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

subdued  adversaries  of  Sarru-kin  seems  to  indicate  that  at 
the  time  of  the  campaign  which  the  sculptures  illustrate,  i.  e., 
the  campaign  described  in  the  second  group  of  Sarru-kin's 
inscriptions,  Barahsi  was  the  leading  political  power  in  Elam; 
it  will  be  noted  that,  as  far  as  Elam  proper  is  concerned,  only 
Susa  is  mentioned,  and  only  at  the  very  end  of  the  list;  the 
second  much  shorter  list,  on  the  other  hand,  mentions  Luhis-AN 

the  son  of  Hi( ),  king  of  Elam,  which  may  be  taken  as 

an  indication  that  at  that  time  Elam  proper  was  the  seat  of 
the  Elamite  kingdom.  It  is,  therefore,  very  likely  that  we 
have  to  do  with  two  separate  campaigns  of  Sarru-kin.  As 
under  Rimus  Elam  and  Barahsi  and  our  Sidgau  again  appear 
as  vanquished  adversaries,  it  is  evident  that  Sarru-kin  did  not 
completely  break  the  power  of  resistance  in  the  Elamitic 
countries,  which  indeed,  owing  to  the  mountainous  character 
of  these  regions,  would  have  been  a  very  difficult  task.  He 
probably  contented  himself  with  accepting  the  submission  and 
the  tribute  of  the  various  governors  and  isakkus,  who  after 
some  time  doubtless  became  lax  in  the  payment  of  tribute, 
thus  necessitating  another  campaign  of  the  Akkadians  against 
Elam.  It  is  probably  such  a  later  campaign  to  which  the  list 
in  Column  16  refers. 

Unfortunately  only  a  few  lines  of  the  inscription  of  Sarru- 
kin  on  his  monument  of  victory  found  at  Susa1  are  preserved  and, 
moreover,  they  do  not  give  us  any  definite  data  of  historical 
bearing.  We  cannot  even  say  whether  this  monument  was  set 
up  at  Susa  by  Sarru-kin  himself,  or  whether  it  was  carried  there 
from  a  Babylonian  city  by  an  Elamite  invader  of  Babylonia. 
For  this  reason  it  must  remain  undecided  at  present  whether 
the  scenes  of  combat  on  the  monument  refer  to  the  Elamite 
wars  of  Sarru-kin  or  not.2  We  see,  however,  that  Sarru-kin 
speaks  of  a  battle  in  which  he  vanquished  the  king(?)  or  the 

'See  Gautier,  RT  27,  p.  176  ff.,  and  Scheil,  Textes  elamites-semitiques  IV,  p  4  ff.  and 
pi.  2,  Nos.  3  and  4.  Photographic  reproductions  of  -the  sculptures  have  not  yet  been  published. 

2  It  is  likely  that  the  short  inscriptions  of  HGT  34  will  give  us  a  clew  for  the  identification 
of  the  scenes  on  the  monument  of  victory. 


A.    POEBEL— INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   AGADfc 


237 


army  of  a  certain  city  (or  country)  of  which  only  the  deter- 
minative ki  is  preserved,  the  inscription  after  this  probably 
relating  some  building  operation,  the  dedication  of  some 
votive  object,  or  most  likely  the  erection  of  the  monument  of 
victory. 

The  second  campaign  of  Sarru-kin  against  Elam  and 
Barahsi  is  the  last  event  of  his  reign  of  which  we  have  knowledge 
from  his  own  inscriptions  at  Nippur,  at  least  as  far  as  they 
are  preserved. 

It  is  of  the  greatest  importance  to  compare  the  historical 
data  gathered  from  these  inscriptions  with  the  traditions 
concerning  Sarru-kin  which  were  current  in  neo- Babylonian 
times. 

On  examining  the  chief  of  the  late  sources,  namely,  the 
chronicle  and  the  historical  references  in  the  omen  texts,  it  will 
be  found  that  the  chronicle  is  in  substance  more  or  less  identical 
with  the  latter  half  of  the  historical  references  in  the  omens; 
moreover,  this  latter  half  of  the  omens  begins  with  a  general 
introductory  phrase  which  would  be  expected  only  at  the  begin- 
ning of  an  account  of  Sarru-kin's  history,  and  in  the  chronicle, 
in  fact,  it  serves  to  introduce  the  section  dealing  with  Sarru-kin. 
There  can,  therefore,  be  no  doubt  that  the  first  section  of  the 
historical  references  in  the  omens  lies  completely  outside  of  the 
chronological  framework  of  the  chronicle  and  of  the  latter  half 
of  the  historical  references  in  the  omens. 

Despite  the  fact  that  the  accounts  of  the  chronicle  and 
of  the  latter  half  of  the  omens  are  substantially  identical,  never- 
theless they  differ  greatly  in  details,  the  first  paragraph,  e.  g., 
showing  no  less  than  four  variants  considerably  altering  the 
meaning  of  the  text.  Compare 


Chronicle 
Introduction 
Sarru-kin  sar  Agadekl  ina  pale 

distar  ilamma 
Sanina  u  mahiri  ul  iSi 
Salummatsu  eli  matati  itbuk 


Omens 

Sarru-kin  Sa  ina  Siri  ann[f] 

[ina  pale  distar]  ilamma 
sanina  GABA-RI  ul  i$u 
salummatsu  eli  [matati  itbuku] 


238  UNIVERSITY   MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 


Chronicle 
Section  / 

tamta  ina  sit  samsi  ibirma 


Omens 


tamta  sa  ereb  Samsi  ibiruma 


MU-//-KAM  mat  ereb  samsi  adi          MU-j-KAM  ina  ereb  Sams'!  adi 


kitisu  qatsu  iksud 
pisu  ana  istin  ukin 
salmesu  ina  ereb  samsi  usziz 


kitisu  q]atsu  ikSudu 
pisu  asar  isten  ukinu 
salmesu  ina  ereb  samsi  [uszijzzu 


sallatsunu  ina  amati  usebira  sallasunu  ina  mati  tamta  usebira 

The  chronicle,  e.  g.,  states  that  Sarru-kin  crossed  the 
eastern  sea,  and  without  mentioning  any  details  concerning 
this  expedition  in  the  east,  at  once  begins  to  speak  of  the  con- 
quest of  the  western  country  to  its  very  ends.  Instead  of 
"sea  in  the  east"  the  omens  have  "sea  of  the  west"  which  at 
first  thought  might  seem  to  be  more  in  harmony  with  the  account 
of  the  conquest  of  the  West,  immediately  following,  but  in 
reality  brings  in  a  new  difficulty,  since,  in  order  to  reach  what 
the  Babylonians  knew  as  the  country  of  the  West,  it  is  not 
necessary  to  cross  the  western  sea.  Moreover,  the  crossing  of 
the  Mediterranean  would  have  been  an  achievement  for  which 
we  have  no  other  parallel,  whereas  we  know  of  several  instances 
when  the  "eastern  sea,"  i.  e.,  the  Persian  Gulf,  was  crossed  by 
a  Babylonian  or  Assyrian  army,  e.  g.,  under  Manistusu,  one  of 
Sarru-kin's  successors. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  inscriptions  of  Sarru-kin  neither 
contain  the  statement  that  he  crossed  the  eastern  sea,  nor  that 
he  passed  over  the  western  sea,  although  Sarru-kin  certainly 
would  not  have  failed  to  make  mention  of  such  an  achievement, 
since  he  mentions  a  fact  of  such  minor  importance  as  the  washing 
of  his  weapons  in  the  waters  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  Nevertheless, 
the  inscriptions  at  least  testify  that  Sarru-kin  reached  the 
shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf  in  his  war  against  Lugal-zaggisi, 
and  that  afterwards  he  subjugated  the  lands  from  the  upper 
sea  to  the  lower  sea,  or,  according  to  the  Semitic  version,  sub- 
dued the  upper  sea  and  the  lower  sea  themselves.  There  is 
the  possibility  that  the  original,  from  which  the  present  texts 
of  the  chronicle  and  the  omens  have  been  derived,  contained 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF   AGADE  239 

a  statement  to  this  effect  which,  however,  by  the  long  process 
of  recopying  and  abbreviating  may  have  been  disfigured  to  its 
present  condition.  Perhaps  the  idea  that  Sarru-kin  crossed  the 
eastern  sea  was  even  suggested  under  the  influence  of  the 
historical  tradition  that  ManiStusu  traversed  the  Persian  Gulf. 

The  point  to  which  Sarru-kin's  conquest  of  the  West  was 
carried  is  designated  in  the  chronicle  as  the  end  of  the  western 
country,  with  no  hint  as  to  where  this  end  has  to  be  sought. 
It  will  be  remembered  that  Sarru-kin  himself  mentions  the 
Cedar  Forest  and  the  Silver  Mountains  as  the  farthest  points  to 
which  he  penetrated  or  extended  his  power.  Should  these  have 
been  regarded  by  the  Babylonians  as  the  extreme  boundaries 
of  what  here  is  called  the  country  of  the  West,  then  indeed  the 
passage  in  the  chronicle  and  the  omens  might  be  taken  as  a 
correct  variation  of  Sarru-kin's  own  statement;  however,  it 
is  more  likely  that  the  wording  of  the  statement  is  due  to  some 
careless  exaggeration,  unless  the  writer  perhaps  simply  wishes 
to  say  that  Sarru-kin  conquered  the  country  as  far  as  the 
Mediterranean. 

Our  suggestion  as  to  the  solution  of  the  difficulties  in  the 
passage  of  the  chronicle  referring  to  the  crossing  of  the  sea 
receives  a  strong  support  by  the  observation  that  the  account 
of  the  subjugation  of  the  westland  is  followed  in  the  chronicle 
by  a  statement  concerning  the  wide  extension  of  Sarru-kin's 
residence;  for  in  Sarru-kin's  own  inscriptions,  in  Columns 
3  and  4  as  well  as  in  Columns  5  and  6,  the  passages  which  are 
intended  to  illustrate  the  splendor  of  the  royal  household  take 
exactly  the  same  place  immediately  after  the  report  on  the 
subjugation  of  the  "upper,"  i.  e.,  the  "western  country,"  and 
it  is  very  remarkable  that  in  the  passage  which  the  omens  give 
in  addition  to  the  text  of  the  chronicle,  or  rather  instead  of  an 
ill-suiting  general  statement  in  the  latter,  the  very  phrase, 
although  somewhat  enlarged,  is  employed  as  that  used  by 
Sarru-kin,  as  will  be  seen  by  a  comparison  of  Omens  29:  dannflti 
izzizunisumma  ekiam  inilik  iqbusu  and  No.  34,  Column  2 
[ malms']  Sarru-kin  sarri  matim  izazuni. 


240  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

After  the  section  dealing  with  Sarru-kin's  residence  and 
his  court,  the  chronicle  and  the  omens  mention  a  campaign 
against  Kastubila  of  Kazalla  and  the  utter  destruction  of  his 
city.  No  parallel  account  of  this  campaign  is  found  in  the 
inscriptions  represented  in  No.  34,  at  least  so  far  as  the  text 
is  preserved.  It  would  be  tempting  to  recognize  this  campaign 
in  that  against  Barahsi  and  Elam  which  forms  the  subject  of 
the  second  group  of  inscriptions;  however,  this  would  necessitate 
the  further  assumption  that  Kazalla  has  wrongly  been  given 
the  prominence  which  it  has  in  the  present  account,  since  in 
Sarru-kin's  inscriptions  it  is  evidently  Barahsi  and  its  king 
against  whom  the  campaign  is  directed.  Now  we  know  that 
Rimus,  the  successor  of  Sarru-kin,  conquered  and  devastated 
the  city  of  Kazallu,  and  the  assumption  would  by  no  means 
be  improbable  that  this  deed  of  King  Rimus  was  later  erroneously 
ascribed  to  the  first  king  of  Agade.  At  present,,  however,  it  is 
entirely  impossible  to  adduce  the  slightest  proof  for  this  sugges- 
tion, since  our  Nippur  inscriptions  by  no  means  represent  a 
complete  chronicle  of  the  events  of  Sarru-kin's  reign  and  indeed, 
Kazalla  may  very  well  have  been  destroyed  by  Sa"rru-kin  in 
a  later  period  of  his  rule.  In  this  case,  however,  we  should 
hardly  expect  to  find  it  again  under  RimuS  among  the  states 
opposing  the  Akkadians. 

One  of  Sarru-kin's  campaigns  against  Elam,  however, 
is  referred  to  in  the  first  paragraph  of  the  first  half  of  the  omens; 
but  we  learn  here  nothing  beyond  the  general  fact  that  Sarru- 
kin  marched  against  Elam,  conquered  and  devastated  it.  More- 
over, Elam  is  here  evidently  used  as  a  general  designation  for 
the  whole  country  to  the  east  of  Babylonia.  Likewise  we  find 
in  the  second  and  in  several  of  the  later  omens  Mar-tukl  used 
as  a  designation  for  the  whole  West  although  at  Sarru-kin's 
time  this  term  can  have  applied  only  to  a  restricted  region. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  grouping  in  the  first  part 
of  the  collection  of  omens  follows  to  some  extent  the  same  plan 
as  in  the  second  part,  in  that  it  first  refers  to  a  campaign  directed 
against  the  East,  then  to  a  campaign  against  the  West  and  in 


A.    POEBEL — INSCRIPTIONS  OF    KINGS  OF  AGADE  241 

the  third  paragraph  speaks  of  Sarru-kin's  residence.  It  is, 
therefore,  very  likely  that  the  compiler  of  this  first  collection 
took  the  principle  upon  which  the  second  half  was  compiled 
as  his  pattern,  unless  indeed  both  collections  go  back  to  a  com- 
mon primary  source. 

The  events  which,  according  to  the  express  statement  of 
the  chronicle,  took  place  in  Sarru-kin's  old  age,  namely,  the 
general  revolt  against  Sarru-kin,  the  subsequent  campaign 
against  the  Subari,  the  destruction(F)  of  Babylon(?)  and  the 
revolt  in  the  last  year  or  years  of  Sarru-kin,  are  not  recorded 
in  the  temple  inscriptions  of  Nippur;  this  fact  need  not  be 
regarded  as  in  any  way  remarkable,  since  Sarru-kin's  death 
may  have  prevented  him  from  erecting  a  monument  commemo- 
rating his  last  exploits.  We  have  seen  that  in  Sarru-kin's 
wars  against  Elam  and  Barahsi  in  part  the  same  persons  occur 
as  in  Rimus'  inscriptions,  which  shows  that  these  campaigns 
must  be  assigned  to  the  end  of  Sarru-kin's  reign;  the  general 
revolt  just  referred  to  then  would  naturally  have  to  be  placed 
in  the  very  last  period  of  Sarru-kin's  reign,  which  indeed  would 
be  in  complete  accordance  with  the  conclusions  just  drawn. 

The  revolt  recorded  by  the  chronicle  at  the  end  of  Sarru- 
kin's  reign,  however,  seems  to  be  confirmed  by  the  so-called 
cruciform  monument,  the  unknown  king  of  which  says  that  all 
the  lands  left  to  him  by  his  father  Sarru-kin  revolted  against 
him.  In  its  strict  sense,  it  is  true,  this  passage  can  only  prove 
that  the  lands  were  in  revolt  after  Sarru-kin's  death;  never- 
theless, the  assumption  would  be  entirely  possible  that  this 
revolt  began  under  Sarru-kin  himself,  perhaps  immediately 
before  his  death.  This  indeed  is  exactly  what  the  last  sentence 
of  the  chronicle's  account  of  Sarru-kin's  reign  says,  for  the 
words  ik-ki-ru-su-ma  la  za-la-la  i-mi-id  [sada-su]  mean  "they 
revolted  against  him  and  without  being  able  to  lie  down  (for 
a  rest)  he  died." 

Reviewing  the  comparison  of  the  inscriptions  and  the 
later  traditions,  it  will  be  observed  that  in  a  general  sense  there 
are  sufficient  correspondences  to  show  that  the  statements 


242  UNIVERSITY    MUSEUM — BABYLONIAN    SECTION 

of  the  chronicle  and  of  the  omens  were  originally  based  on 
good  historical  information;  at  the  same  time,  however,  one 
cannot  avoid  seeing  that  in  all  details  the  reliability  of  the 
present  text  of  the  chronicle  as  well  as  the  omens  is  by  no 
means  incontestable. 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY