1)
THE BABYLONIAN EXPEDITION
OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
SERIES A: CUNEIFORM TEXTS
EDITED BY
VOLUME I
Part I, Plates 1-50
PHlIvA DELPHI A
Reprint from the Transactions of t/ie Amer. Pliilos. Society, N. S., Vol. XVIII, No. 1
D. Anson Partridge, Printer and Lithographer
1893
OLD BABYLONIAN INSGBIPTIONS
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR
PART I
Plates i-35 and I-XV
By H. Y. HILPEECHT, Ph.D.,
Professor of Assyrian and Curator of the Babylonian Museum in the University of Pennsylvania
PHILADELPHIA
1893
^
"^ .r^
Corrections.
Page 9, 1. 29 : For Allen read Allan.
Page 14, 1. 31 : 'PorliasuM read lissuhd.
Page 15, 1. 24 : is to be removed.
Page 29, 1. 26 : For I read II.
Page 37, 1. 5 : For Barnaburiash read Burnaburiash.
Page 43, 1. 26: For Menaut read Menant.
PREFACE,
The old Babylonian Cuneiform Texts, which are published in the following
pages, are a part of the harvest gathered by the Expedition sent out in the summer
of 1888, imder the auspices of the University of Pennsylvania, for the exploration
of Babylonia. The Eev. Dr. John P. Peters, Professor of Hebrew in the University
of Pennsylvania, was the Director of the Expedition, while the subscribei-, as the
Assyriologist of the University, accompanied it during the first year of its labors.
As the history of the Expedition is to be published by its Director at an early date,
I here abstain from giving any account of its origin, members, undertakings and
results. In the meantime for the student I have appended to the Introduction a
Bibliography of those contributions of its members to various p'eriodicals which
relate to its work.
Towards the close of the year 1891 there arrived at the Museum of the Univer-
sity some eight thousand clay tablets, together with several hundred fragments of
vases and other inscribed objects in stone, which had been disinterred in Nipjour or
l^uffar.''' I was able at once to proceed with the work of cleaning and examining
them. Three months later I had obtained a general idea of their contents and their
age, and had catalogued about a third of them. On the basis of a reiiort submitted
to the Publication Committee of the Expedition, of which Mr. Clarence H. Clark
is Chairman, a plan was carefully devised for making these cuneiform inscriptions
accessible to a wider circle of students, with as much speed and method as possible.
With this view the Assyriologists of America and Canada were invited to lend their
aid to the preparation of an extensive work on the Expedition and its results. A
number of them have given assurance of their readiness to do so.
In April, 1892, the undei-signed was entrusted by the Committee with the edit-
ing of the series containing the Cuneiform Texts, and, at the same time, Avas requested
* This is the present designation of tlie extensive ruins by the AfFek tribes, in whose territory they are situated.
Although I repeatedly had the Arabs of the neighborhood pronounce for me the name they give to the ancient
Nippur, I never heard from their lips the pronunciation N-fifer, to which Layard and Loftus have given currency
among Assyriologists.
6 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
to undertake at once the preparation of the first volume of these texts. It is esti-
mated that the series will extend to eight or possibly ten volumes. Their general
plan and character are well explained in a report submitted to the American Philo-
sophical Society by a special committee, of which Mr. Talcott Williams was the
Chairman, at the stated meeting of May 20, 1892.
I take this opportunity to acknowledge the liberality of the venerable American
Philosophical Society of Philadelphia, as shown in the promptness with which it has
undertaken the publication of the present volume, by giving it a place in its learned
and valuable Transactions, I hope that in the future the Society will continue to
evince its interest in making such labors accessible to the republic of letters, by ex-
tending its sympathy and support to the undertaking whose plan has been described.
A word more must be said as to the manner in which it is intended to prepai'e
the Cuneiform Texts for the use of the Assyriologist. For the sake of securing
uniformity throughout the series, and of avoiding what would make it excessively
costly, it was necessary to reproduce the inscriptions by photograph from copies
made by hand, rather than from the objects themselves. Besides, the editor some time
ago reached the conclusion that the method of direct photography is not at all satis-
factory in the case of many inscriptions. The best which has been done by that
expensive process is beyond question the work edited by Ernest de Sarzec and Leon
Heuzey under the auspices of the government of France : Decouvertes en Chaldee. It
possesses unique merits. But in spite of all the care that has been taken to secure
an exact reprodxiction of the monuments, any Assyriologist who has worked through
such texts as are found on Plates 33, 35 and 41, N'o. 1, will agree with me that the
decipherment, especially of the margins, makes a very severe demand upon the eye-
sight — a circumstance which makes the prompt and comprehensive use of the con-
tents of this beautiful work sometimes difficult. After mature consideration, there-
fore, the Committee found it most suitable to reproduce the Cuneiform Texts from
copies made by the hand, and to employ photographs from the objects themselves only
occasionally, to enable the Assyriologist to verify the copies and to perceive the
archeological character of the inscribed objects.
The first volume, whose first part I publish herewith, contains only inscriptions
in old Babylonian which have been found on vases, door sockets, stone tablets, votive
axes, bricks, stamps, clay cylinders, and similar objects of a monumental character.
As the most of them belong to that period of Babylonian history of which our
knowledge is very defective, the most painstaking care has been applied to auto-
graphically reproducing the originals with the utmost faithfulness. The editor has
kept in view, not only the making fresh and important materials accessible to
OHIEFLT FROM NIPPUR. 7
students of Assyriology, but also the doing his part in placing Babylonian paleography
on a better foundation. For this end every text has been reproduced in its actual
size and form — that is, so as to show all the peculiarities of the scribes, not only as
to the dimensions, shape and position of every character and group of such, but also
their distance from one another, as was so admirably done by Sir Henry Rawlinson
and Edwin l^orris in the first volume of The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia.
The investigations and collections I have made since the year 1883, and my lec-
tures regularly held since 1886 on " The Development of Cuneiform Writing in
Babylonia and Assyria," have led me to conclude that the size and relative position
of individual cuneiform characters, and certain combinations in which they frequently
occur, have been a factor of importance in the development of the stereotyped forms
of later date. The detailed proof of this I must reserve for the present until more
urgent matters have been disposed of At any rate, careful editions of texts, and
a faithful reproduction of the peculiarities of the individual Babylonian scribe, have
become a pressing necessity for the progress of Assyriology, if we are to attain in
this field anything like the results which Euting has achieved in other departments
of Semitic paleography, and which are so necessary in determining the age of frag-
mentary and undated inscriptions. In spite of the scantiness of representative old
Babylonian texts of which the Assyriologists could make use, it would not have
been possible for them to have differed by 500, 1000 or even 2000 years as to the date
of inscriptions, if such texts had always been reproduced carefully for their use.
It is to be expected that the excavations still proceeding at ]N^uffar will supply
the completion of texts here given in fragmentary shape, and that several finds will
make their way into various European and American museums by reason of the
thievishness of the Arabs employed in them, who also may carry on excavations on
their own account.'^' For this reason I have shown as exactly as possible the fracture
of such fragments. It was thus that I myself, after the printing had begun, was
enabled to recognize the connection of PL 21, ^o. 41 and ]^o. 46, and between PI.
22, ^o. 50, and PI. 26, I^o. 74.
Where I have shaded the inscription in my copy, it is not meant to indicate
that the reading is to me uncertain, but that it can be i-ecognized only in a special
light and by a practiced eye, looking at it from an especial angle. How necessary it
was to make an autograph copy of such inscriptions may be seen by comparing PI. 23,
iNos. 56, 57, and the direct photographic reproduction on PI. X. A restoration of broken
characters and lines I have avoided on principle, even when there was no doubt in my
own mind as to what was missing. My translations will show in due time what my
• Cf. my note in Zeittchrift fur Agayriologie, IV, p. 282 seq. Sayce, Record* of the Pait\ Vol. Ill, pp. x, note
3, XV.
8 OLD BABTLOKIAN INSCRIPTIONS
understanding of such passages is. For obvious reasons, I have given the characters
in some inscriptions only in outline. Of the plates which reproduce the inscription on
the Abu Ilabba slab I have avoided altogether making an autograph copy, since I
thought this needless. This stone v^^as found in Abu Habba during the excavation
undertaken at the private expense of the Sultan in 1889, and is now in the Imperial
Museum at Constantinople. Through the courtesy of His Excellency Hamdy-Bey,
a cast of it was furnished to our Expedition. Unfortunately this was broken in
pieces in transportation, but it was restored by one of my students. It is this cast
that has been directly photographed for the present publication. Some portions of
its margin have an-indistinctness, which is faithfully shown by the photographic le-
production.
To convey to scholars a clearer picture of the ruins of Nippur, and to show the
sites at which the several inscriptions were found, a ]Aan of the excavations of the
first year is given. In the Table of Contents the texts are described with reference
to this Plan, which has been prepared in accordance with the bas-relief of the ruins
made by Mr. Charles Muret in Paris under the supervision of Mr. Perez Hastings
Field, the architect of the Expedition.
In determining the mineralogic character of the several stones, I have had the
assistance of my colleagues, Drs. Gr. A. Koenig and E. Smith, of the University of
Pennsylvania, to whom I extend my thanks. As I was able to accompany the'
Expedition only during the first year, I am greatly indebted to my esteemed col-
league. Dr. Peters, for much valuable information as to the sites in which objects
were found, and for sketches and copies of a series of objects and inscriptions which
he made during its second year. As the anticpiities disinterred arrived in this coun-
try at long intervals, I found myself obliged to proceed with the help of casts,
squeezes, electrotypes and Prof Peters' notebooks, in order not to delay needlessly
the publication of the Texts. This circumstance, however, prevented my determin-
ing at the outset the material of the whole volume. At the opening of each new
box I found myself compelled to withdraw some pages and substitute others, until
the commencement of the printing, in October of last year, made further alterations
and a more systematic arrangement impossible. The second part of this volume,
which will appear in about half a year, will furnish further inscriptions of kings
who are already represented in the first. Nor will it be possible entirely to avoid
this defect of arrangement in other volumes, so long as the excavations at Nippur
continue to bring to light new inscriptions of the same rulers. If, however, we
were to delay the publication of the inscriptions until the complete results of the
systematic exijlorations of the ruin-heaps at Nippur were at hand, it would have
CHIEFLT TROM NIPPUR. 9
been necessary, according to my careful calculation, to wait some twenty years, sup-
posing that the excavations were pushed forward with a force of some hundred Arab
workmen.
On account of its importance and its close connection with the class of Cas-
site votive inscriptions here published, I have included the cuneiform text on the
lapis lazuli disc of King Kadashman-Turgu, which probably came from ISTippur,*
and is now in the Museum of Harvard University,! Cambridge, Mass. Prof. D. G.
Lyon kindly gave me leave to publish this, and placed at my disposal a cast of the
disc, for which he has my warmest thanks.
The transcription of the names of kings in the Table of Contents is the usual
one. A new transliteration has been substituted only where there are sufficient
grounds for departing from that formeily used. The texts in the main have been
arranged chronologically, in the order of the Babylonian dynasties ; yet where the
better utilization of space seemed to justify this, and also, as already said, because
it was impossible to obtain at the outset all the material of the present volume, I
have departed from that order in a few instances. ]S'or have I attempted to distin-
guish between the inscriptions of Kurigalzu I and II, simply because, with the
material now at our disposal, it is not possible to do so with any certainty.
Three other volumes of cuneiform texts are in preparation. The transcription and
translation of the inscriptions here given are as good as completed, and will appear
at an early date. From this translation I have excluded the Abu Habba slab and
the two Yokha tablets (Plates VI-YIII). These latter are to be treated in connection
with other tablets of similar character and contents. A translation of the former I
propose to publish separately in the course of next summer, in cooperation with my
esteemed colleague, Dr. P. Jensen, Professor in the University of Marburg.
In conclusion, it is but just that I should express here publicly my profound
gratitude to Dr. William Pepper, Provost of the University of Pennsylvania, Messrs.
Clarence H. Clark, E. W. Clark, W. W. Frazier, Charles C. Harrison, Prof. Dr.
Horace Jayne, Prof. Allen Marquand, Jos. D. Potts, Rev. Dr. H. Clay Trumbull,
Talcott Williams, Richard Wood, Stuart Wood, and to all the other gentlemen whose
lively interest in the history and civilization of ancient Babylonia, and whose liberal
and constant support, have made possible the thorough researches at one of the most
ancient ruins of the world. | That the publication of this first part of the results
* Cf. Hilprecht, " Die Votiv Inschrift eines nicht erkannten Kassitenkonigs, " Z. A. VII, p. 318.
t Cf. Lyon, "On a Lapis Lazuli Disc" in the Proceedings of the American Oriental Society, May, 1889, pp.
cxxxiv-vii.
t Cf. Pinches, Records oj the Past ', Vol. VI, p. 109, 1. 6. (The Non-Semitic Version of the Creation Story).
10 OLD BABrLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.
obtained by the American Expedition does not take place until nearly four years after
it was begun, is due to the extraordinary difficulties it encountered, on both sea and
land, through shipwreck near Samos, through the hostility of Arab tribes, through
the bui'ning and plundering of our camp, through the outbreak of malignant cholera
in Babylonia, through the delay of the antiquities on their way to America, and
through the severe illness from which nearly all the members suffered. Often it
seemed as though the grewsome curse of King Sargon T, one of the oldest monuments
of Semitic speech published in the following pages, had rested on the American Expe-
dition, as that of the Phoenician king Eshmunazar rested on Napoleon : " Whosoever
removes this inscribed stone, his foundation may Bel and Shamash and Ninnatear up,
and exterminate his seed !" We trust, however, that the rage of Enlil, lord of the
demons, who set loose against the Expedition all the Tgigi and Anunnaki, will abate
with the publication of these cuneiform inscriptions, almost every one of which pro-
claims the glory of the great Bel, " lord of the lands," and that the curse of nearly six
thousand years ago will be transformed into the kindly blessing which King Nazi-
Maruttash utters in his poetic prayer:
ikribisJiu ana sheme . to hear his prayer,
teslissu magari to grant his supplication,
unnenishu leke to accept his sigh,
napiakiashu namrt to preserve his life,
iimeshu urruke to lengthen his days.
(PI. 27, No. 78.)
H. V. HiLPREOHT.
Philadelphia, January 1, 1893.
INTRODUCTION.
The cuneiform tablets and stone inscriptions, excavated by the Expedition in
Nippur, embrace a period of about 3350 years — c. 8800 to c. 450^ B. C. About one
hundred and twenty kings of Babylon, Ur and other cities are known to belong to
this period of Babylonian history. Forty-five of these, according to our present
knowledge, have left personal inscriptions or documents dated according to their reigns
in Nippur. Several of these rulers, whose names were only partly preserved or other-
wise obscure, or whose chronology and duration of reign were doubtful, have been
placed in new light by the American excavations, while others can now for the
first time be studied from their own inscriptions. Among other points the following
have been established : The correct reading of Ur-Ninib of Isin, instead of Qamil-
Ninih- as heretofore; the proof of the existence of King Ibil-Sin, or better, Ini-
Sin of Ur,' already discovered by George Smith," but not generally accepted by
Assyriologists ; the proper pronunciation of the name Nazi-Maruttash;-' the correct
transcription of the group Ka-dash-man, instead of the hitherto Ka-ara, in a series of
Cassite proper names;'' the completion of the name of the twenty-seventh king in
the Babylonian list b' to ShagasJiaUi-Shuriash^ (Shamash is deliverance), instead of
the usual STiagashalti-Buriash'^ (Ramman is deliverance) ; the completion of the Cas-
site king [ i\a-slm in 8. 2106, Obv. 1. 9,^" to Bibeiashu, and the identity of
the latter with Bibe,^ the son of Shagashalti-Shuriash; the first inscription of the
' Contract dated in the reign of King Artaxerxes I. A number of coins, about one Imndred terra cotta bowls
bearing Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic inscriptions, aud many other objects, which belong to tlie Nippur of the Christian
era, are here excluded.
• Hilprecht, " Die Votiv-Inschrifl eines nicht erliannten Kassitenkonigs" in Z. A. VH, p. 315, note 1.
» Hilprecht, "Koniglni-Sin von Ur" in Z. A. VH, pp. 343-346.
• Tram. 8oe. Bibl. Arch. I, p. 41.
5 Hilprecht, I. c, pp. 310, 311.
• Hilprecht, I. c, pp. 809, 314, 815.
' Wincliler, Unterauchungen zur Altorientaluehen Oeschiehte, p. 146, col. ii, 6.
' Hilprecht, " Die Ergiinzung der Namen zweier Kassitenkonige," Z. A., in print.
' Cf. Winckler in Z. A. II, p. 310, and Unters., p. 30.
'» Winckler, Unters., p. 152.
12 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIOTSTS
kings liammdn-shum-umr^ and his son MUi-SMkhu;'' and the determination of
the approximate duration of the reigns of the Cassite kings Kurigalzu, Nazi-
Maruttash, etc., their succession and kinship with each other. In addition, the
following new kings have been added by the Expedition to those ah-eady known :
1. AlusharsMd ; 2. Bur- Sin I; 3. Q ancle ;■' 4. Kadashman-Turgu (Kadashman-
Bel) ; 5. Kudur-Turgu {Bel) ; 6. Bel-nddin-aplu.
Intending to give in the near future the transcription and translation of the in-
scriptions here published, I confine myself at present to the following points :
THE OLDEST SEMITIC KINGS OF BABYLONIA.
Of the cuneiform inscriptions of the oldest Semitic kings of Babylonia very few
have been discovered. Winckler recently published them together in his Althahy-
lonische Keilschrrftiexte, p. 22.* Undoubtedly to this ancient period belongs also the
inscription '^ of the king of the country of Guti, ^. e., " of the country and people to the
east of the lower Zab, in the upper section of the region through which the Adhem and
the Dijala rivers flow."" Various reasons' compel me to differ from Winckler's de-
termination as to the date of this inscription by about 2000 years, ^. e., to transfer it
from the time of Agum (Winckler, Oeschichte, p. 82), about 1600 B. C, back to the
time of Sargon, about 3800 B. C. ** Because of the very archaic form of the cunei-
■ Hitherto represented only by a boundary stone dated in the time of the liings Ramman-shum-iddina, RammSn-
shum-usur and Mili-Shilihu. Cf. Belser in Beitrage zur Assyriologie 11, pp. 187-303 (quoted hereafter as B. A.) and
Peiser in Schrader's KeilinsehrifUicJie Bihliothek III, Part 1, pp. 154-163 (quoted hereafter as K. B.)
^ For the reasons ft)r identifying the liing of the inscription PI. 29, No. 83, with Mili-Shikhu, see below, p. 36.
* Unless identical with Gandash, the first king of the Cassite dynasty. Cf. pp. 38-30.
* Cf. Winckler, in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part I, pp. 98-107.
* Published by Winckler, Z. A. IV, p. 406.
* Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradiea? pp. 333-337. Cf. Delattre, VAsie oecidentale dans les inscriptions Assyriennes.
' The predominant use of the archaic line-shaped characters, their marked agreement with a whole series of
characters on Plates 1 to 5, the Semitic speech, and its whole phraseology, together with the peculiarities to be seen
in the sibilants, which are the same in the texts of Sargon I from Nippur, the fact that Abu Habba, where other texts of
the same high antiquity have been disinterred, is the place of its discovery, the use of a " perforated stone " as votive
object for the inscription, itself a characteristic of ancient times, the mineralogic character of the stone, and last of
all— just what Winckler {Z. A. IV, p. 406) is disposed to regard as proof of a later origin— the notably sharp and
skillful carving of the inscription. This last proof is especially convincing, for it is a characteristic trait of the oldest
Semitic cuneiform inscriptions carved in stone, that they are engraved with a beauty and a sharpness which are
absent from those of later date (cf. also Hommel, Oeschichte, p. 301).
' It will not be objected that the cuneiform characters, indeed, seem to indicate a great antiquity, but that they
may very well be an imitation of the work of an earlier period by a later king. This has become a very favorite
mode of reasoning when the date of an undated inscription is to be determined from Its writing (e. g., Amiaud et
Mechineau, Tableau Compare, p. xiii seqq.. Pinches, Eebraica VI, p. 57), and serves to produce a very chaos of uncer-
tainty in the province of Babylonian paleography. I think it opportune to state here Uiat I am not acquainted with
CHIEFLY TROM NIPPtTR. 13
form characters and of certain mutilated passages, this inscription of the king of Guti
presents great difficulties, so that, to ray knowledge, it has never been translated, and
Winckler has come to the conclusion that it was composed "apparently in part in the
native tongue " of the king of Guti. Winckler would not be entirely incorrect if he
understood by this " native tongue " ^ the Semitic-Babylonian of the inscriptions of
Sargon I, for the text is written in pure Semitic-Babylonian, and reads as follows :
1 La-si(?)-ra(?)-ab(?) 2, da-num" 3. sliar 4. Ou-ti-im 5-10. vacant \1. ip-ushi^)
-ma 12. iddin 13. sha duppa 14. sM-a ^ 15. u-sa-za-ku-ni IG. ziMr shum-mi
17. i-sa-da-ru 18. '"'Ou-ti-im 19. ""'Mnna 20. u 21. ''"/Sm 22. ishid-su 23. li-su-ha
24. u 25. zera-sa 26. li-il-gu-da 27. « 28. harrdn alJcat(-Jcat)-su 29. a i-si-ir, " Lasi-
rab (?), the mighty king of Guti, .... has made and presented (it). Whosoever
removes this inscribed stone and writes (the mention of) his name thereupon, his
a solitary instance in which such an imitation of the older cuneiform characters hy a later Babylonian ruler has been
shown with certainty. What is commonly regarded as such may be traced to a lack of carefulness in examining the
single characters of the inscriptions in question. Gande's endeavor to imitate the characters of earlier Babylonian kings
is to be judged entirely differently (see below). In Babylonia at all times two systems of writing — a hieratic and a
demotic — existed side by side. The latter is the system used in the aSairs of everyday life, and was subject to a con-
tinuous process of change and development, which resulted at last in the stereotyped cuneiform characters of the Neo-
Babylonian and Persian contract tablets. What I have called the hieratic system of cuneiform writing was identical
with the demotic in the earliest times ; but later was confined to religious literature (including seal -cylinders) and
formularies originally bearing a religious character (boundary stones, etc.). Although, in the nature of things, it was
less subject to change than the other, yet it developed distinctly different forms of most characters in the different
periods of its history. In more or less dependence upon the material inscribed, the local tradition and the peculiari-
ties of the individual scribe, the hieratic writing also passed through a course of development, more limited in extent,
but peculiar to itself When due attention is given to these facts in every case, there will be an end to the weltering
confusion of early and late texts, and of the critical helplessness which results from this, in the field of Babylonian
paleography.
' It is true, indeed, that the question as to whether the earliest inhabitants of Guti spoke a Semitic language (cf.
Hommel, Oeschichte, pp. 279, 300, note 3) cannot be regarded as definitely answered, if we maintain that the " perfo-
rated stone" was a gift of the king of Guti to the temple in Sippara (cf. "The King of Ghana," Trans. Soe. BiU.
Arch. VIII, p. 353). In this case the inscription might very well have been composed in the Semitic dialect used in
Sippara. I hold, however, that the object was not a gift of the king of Guti to the temple of Sippara (observe the
absence of god Shamash and the first position given to god Guti), but that it had been carried off as booty from the
land of Guti by one of the earliest Babylonian kings, in the same way as the vase of Naram-Sin {namrak Magan)
and most of the vases of Alusharshid (cf. PI. 4, 1. 11, 12 : namrak Elamti) were carried to Babylonia. From this it
certainly would result that, just like the inhabitants of Lulubi (cf Scheil, Becueil de Trmaux XIV, Uvr. 1 et 2,
p. 104), so also those of Guti spoke Semitic and worshiped the Babylonian gods Ninna and Sin, along with their prin-
cipal national god Guti. This last deity seems to have given his name to their country, as did the god Ashur to the
city and land of Ashur (cf also Ni(a?)nna and Nineveh, etc.), and the god Shushinak to the city of Shiishinak or
Susa (cf. Hagen in B. A. II, p. 233).
'' Cf. Jensen, in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part I, p. 116, note 5.
" Winckler offers za. Apparently this reading results from an oversight either on the part of Winckler or of the
ancient scribe ; for cf. PI. 1, 13 ; PI. 2 (and I), 14.
14 OLD BABTLONIAlf INSCRIPTIONS
foundation may Guti, Ninna and Sin tear up and exterminate his seed, and may
whatsoever he undertakes not prosper ! " ^
To the time of Sargon and Naram-rSin ^ belongs also the first of the two inscrip-
tions of Ser-i-Pul (Steles de Zohdb), published by Messrs. J. de Morgan and V.
Scheil ill Recueil de Travaux relatifs a la JPhilologie et a V Arch'ologie egyptiennes et
assyriennes XIV, Liv. 1, 2, 1892, pp. 100-106. Both of these badly mutilated
inscriptions are written in a Semitic^ dialect, and the phraseology is very similar to
that of the king of Guti. Scheil offei's a transliteration and translation of the
preserved portions. In regard to the first inscription I remark, however, that col. I,
11: ii DUB BA AM, can hardly be read (with Scheil) u duhhamJ^ The preceding
phrase, salmetum annitum, " these images," and the parallel passage of the Guti
text and PI. 1 and 2 of the present volume — dtipjM shu'a — require a demonstrative
pronoun in connection with duppa. I therefore regard BA as the ideogr. for sJiit^atu^'
and read duppa shu'atam^-am), "this inscribed stone." The second character in
col. II, 10, which Scheil does not recognize (l. c, p. 105) is il,'^ and the line
' In the interpretation I remark tlie following : L. 2. da-num is not to be regarded independently as an apposi-
tive representing the usual sharru da-num {Stele de Zo?iab I, col. 1, 2), but must be joined with shar Outim, as "the
mighty king of Guti." The position of the adjective before the substantive is not so much due to the emphasis of the
adjective (Del. Oram., % 121) as to the endeavor to avoid separating the adjective from the noun to which it belongs.
Li. 14. Shu'a (or sliuwa) is the older form from wliicli sJm'atu, resp. shu'atu, has been derived. Cf. Arabic huwt,
Del. Oram., § 57, and Jager, in B. A. 1, p. 481 seg. L. 15. 17. usazakuni, isataru are uot present tenses of tlie
stems IIIj and I2 respectively (= utsazakuni, iiaataru), but, in consideration of 1. 29, are to be regarded as IIIi and I,
= ushazakuni {Stele de Zohab I, 12) =: uslwzzakuni =^ uslianzaku + ?w' (Del. Oram., § 79 /?) and ishataru. 8h
between two vowels, or with an m following, was apparently pronounced as s (cf. also PI. 1 and 2). The root of
mazdku is -jlj or plj, II R. 30, 43, «,/ (Jensen, Eosmologie, p. 339), not -jva (Scheil, I. c, p. 108). It means "to be in
motion, to move" (intr.). Cf naziklu, II R. 23, 65, e,f, synon. ol daltti, " door "==" that which moves (on a hinge);"
izzuk mulmullu (Creation Tablet IV, 101), "the spear quivered." 111,= "to move (trans.), to remove." This
meaning is supported by parallel passages, as V R. 33, col. VIII, 43 : mannu sha itabalu (Jensen, in Schrader's JK. B.,
Ill, Part I, p. 153, note 3) shumishir kima shumi'a ishataru, " Whoever carries off (the tablet) and writes his name as
my name." L. lO. The sign j'isA— dialect, for MU — signifies apparently zjXtm (Sargon Cyl., 1. 50). Cf. Jensen,
Z. A. I, p. 184. Ii. 23. U8uU = U8Suka, nOJ. Cf. PI. 3, 20 (PI. 1, 31 : lissuhu). For the a of the 3d pers. masc.
plur., cf Del. Gram., §90, c. L. 26. Zii7(sic ! = Briinnow, I. c, 4SA'7)-gu-da=Ulkuia, cf PI. 2, 23. PI. 1, 24
reads in its place li-il-gu-tu =^lUkuiu, Dpb. Cf the corresponding Sumerian phrase at the close of the inscription of
Kadashman-Turgu, PI. 24, No. 63. L. 28 is uncertain. The second character I regard as HI— alaku, and the
third character, kat (Briinnow, List, 2701), a phonetic compliment. According to the scribe's method of writing", we
should expect but one word on this line. Li. 29. a isir = a ishir, Prffit. I, of ity'. Cf. Ill R. 61, No. 2, 14 : alkai
mati la ishahir, "the business {Handel und Wandel, Del.) of the land may not prosper."
^ Thus, correctly, Scheil, I. c, p. 105. The second is considerably younger.
» Also the features of the king Anu-banini of Lulubi, carved together with the inscription in the rock, are mani-
festly Semitic.
* Scheil translates '•cette tablette," but adds "cette" only from the general context.
' Perhaps it is to be read directly shu, and the two characters must be transcribed as shu-am. Cf. also Amiaud,
in Z. A. II, p. 292.
* No. 73 in Amiaud et Mfichineau, Tableau compare, must be corrected accordingly.
CHIEFLY FBOM NIPPITK. 15
reads U-il-ku-du = liWutii. The second inscription {sUle de Gheikh-Khdn) is, in
mj estimation, misunderstood' by Scheil. There is no question of " restoration," *
but of the first erection of the image.
To this, the ah-eady known material touching the oldest Semitic period, has
come now to be added Pi, 1-7. The above remarlis upon the texts of the kings of
Guti and Lullubi open the way for a better understanding of these new texts. The
following notes supply all that still needs to be added.
The excavations have brought to light six inscribed objects of Sargon 1 : two
brick stamps of baked clay, the fragment of a thii-d, and three door sockets. The
brick stamps -are made from the same mould. The inscription (PI. 3, No. 3) reads
as follows : 1. Shar-ga-ni-shar-dU 2. shar 3. A-ga-de''' 4. bini (BA.-GIM) 5. bit
6. ^'^Bel, "Sharganlsharali, king of Agade, builder^ of the temple of Bel." Judging
from their appearance, these brick stamps were never practically used, but were pre-
sented by Sargon as temple-offerings to Bel in commemoration of his work ; or per-
haps they were placed in the corners of the structure erected by him, as was the case
with the later clay cylinders.'' That others which were of the same form as these
were used for stamping bricks can neither be proved nor denied.'
Of greater importance are the door sockets, which contain the longest inscriptions
of Sargon thus far known. Two of these are exactly alike in their contents (PI. 2).
The inscription of the third (PI. 1) differs somewhat. PI. 2, as the more important,
reads as follows: 1. ^^"Shar-ga-m-shar-dli 2. mdr IUi(-U)-^'"Bel S. da-num 4:. shar
5. A-ga-de''' 6. a 7. su'''-u-la-ti 8. i^'^Bel 9. bdni 10. SJ-l-uf 11. bit ^^^Bel 12. w
Nippur^^, etc.,* " ShargunisharrUi, son of Itti-Bel, the mighty king of Agade and of the
dominion (?) .... of Bel, builder of Ekur, temple of Bel in Nippur." From this text
we learn the interesting fact that Sargon's father was Itti-Bel (" With-Bel ").^ Inas-
' ushziz never signifies "to restore," but "to set up ;" enuna laban, as Sclieil transcribes, could never be (Gram-
mar !? ) tlie Babylonian or even Lulubitic equivalent for "alors qu' elle tombait."
'' The cuneiform characters have been executed in relief, and are larger at the base than at the top. My copy
gives the exact size of the characters at the base, while the photograpliic reproduction illustrates the size at the top.
' Banu means to build something or to build at something that already existed, i. e., to add to it or to restore it if
it vfas in ruins. All that we can say of Sargon is that he was a builder of the temple, but not its first builder.
• " One of the cylinders from Babylon, now in the British Museum, was not found, as I was able to learn from the
man who discovered it, in a corner, but in a niche in the side of a long wall " (Peters).
^ Winckler's doubts {Oeseh., p. 86) are dissipated by the evidence of the phrases bani hit Bel and bani Ekar Vit
Bel in Nijipur (Plates 1-3).
^ Briinnow, I. c, 803 (Jensen). The significance of iiilati (or plur. sulati ? ) is not certain. Is nnO (Jer. 33, 4)
to be compared ?
' This — not E-shar (Delitzsch, Oeseh., p. 33) — was the name of the temple of B§l in Nippur. Cf. Jensen, Ko»-
mologie, pp. 186 seq., 196 neq.
" For the rest, cf. pp. 10, 13, 14.
•Perhaps shortened from Itti-Bel-balata, "With B81 is life" (Strassmaier, Nabon. 466, 13; Cambys. 373, 10). Cf.
the similar formations Itti-Marduk {-Nabu, -Shamash, -Quia, etc.)-balatu in the Contract literature.
16 OLD BABYLONIAlSr INSCRIPTIOKS
much as the latter does not bear the title of king, we may ' see therein a confirma-
tion of the legend^ of Sargon, 1. 2, a-bi ul i-di aim ahi-ia i-ra-mi sha-da-a, "my
father I know not, whereas the brother of my father inhabits the mountain," viz., that
Sargon, being of an inferior birth on his father's side, was a usurper.
My use of Shargdni-shar-dli as identical with 8har-gi-na — known from the in-
scriptions of N"abuna'id as the father of I^aram-Sin — requires a word of explanation.
Saycc,^ Hommel * and Tiele ^ have never called in question the identity of the two
names, reading the name of our king as Shar-ga-ni, and regarding sJiar alias his first
title. Similarly Pinches distinguished between the name and the title, at first'' inter-
preting the latter with Mtmant as lugal-lag, "the messenger king," but afterwards'
with Hommel as shar dli, "king of the city." Menant'^ and Oppert, on the contrary,
believe that 81iar-ga-ni-shar-luli (Menant), or 8h.ar{Bm)-ga-ni-shar-imsi (Oppert''),
or 8har(Hir, Bin)-ga-ni-sliar-ali (Oppert^'') is to be regarded as one word, contain-
ing only the name of the king. More recently Winckler," adopting Oppert's view,
reads the name 8har-ga-ni-shar-mahdzi. He considers the identity of this name with
Sargon as an open question, whilst Oppert holds it to be simply an inadmissible
plaisanterie?^ It is not clear to me what induced Oppert to regard 8har-ga-ni as
identical with Bin-ga-ni?'^ The syllabic value of bin for the sign SHAR is unproven,
and in itself improbable." On the other hand, I share the view of Oppert-Menant in
' This conclusion is very proiiable, but not absolutely certain, as the title of king is very frequently omitted when
the names of the fathers of Cassite kings are referred to, although they are known to have been "kings."
'' Although evidently containing history interwoven with legend, it is nevertheless historically important, as giving
expression to the Babylonian conception of the history of the ancient Sargon. Its value increases in proportion as
we find in it statements which are proven from other sources to be correct. Incidentally, it may be remarked that on
account of the mention of the father's brother in the "Legend," and because of Sargon's own statement concerning
Itli-B81, the clause abl ul idi can only be regarded as meaning that Sargon did not know his father personally, since
the latter was dead (Tiele, I. c, p. 114), or for various reasons was compelled to keep himself in concealment.
» Cf. e. g., R. P\ I, p. 5
M. c, p. 303 seq.
» I. c, p. 488, note 1.
« P. S. B. A. VI, pp. 11-13. 68 aeq. Cf. V, pp. 8, 9, 13 ; VII, pp. 65-71. Trans. S. B. A. VIII. pp. 347-351.
' P. S. B. A., VIII, pp. 243 seq.
' Rectierches sur la Olyptique orientale, p. 74. P. 8. B. A. January a, 1884.
° Collection de Clercq., No. 46, p. 50.
'» Z. A. Ill, p. 124.
" Geseh., pp. 39, 337, and Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 101 **. Cf. UiUers., p. 44 seq.
" Z. A. Ill, p. 134. Ibid. : "quoique roi d'Agade, il n'est pas plus Sargon, que les empereiirs Louis et Lothaire ne
tout un meme personnage." Winckler's article in Reme d' Assyriologie II (quoted in Unters., p. 79, note 4), was un-
fortunately not accessible to me.
" In the name Bi-in-gani-shar-ali on a seal cylinder, published by Menant, Glyptique I, PI. I, No. 1. Cf. Winckler,
Altbabyloniselie Keilsehrifttexte (quoted as A. E.), No. 66.
» Even if it was proved that SHAR has the value of bin, in a few cases, it would be utterly impossible to give the
character this exceptional value in a Semitic word list (V R. 41, 1. 29, a, J). Cf. p. 18, note 4.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 17
regard to the close connection pf these three words as constituting the name of the
king, and read accordingly Shargdni-shar-dli as one word. For, as Oppert properly
states, it is impossible to read the name simply Shar-ga-ni, inasmuch as, according to
the parallel passages of the oldest Semitic cuneiform texts, in this case we should ex-
pect the two parts (Shargdni and shdr-dli) to be separated by a line. Only individual
words, or two expressions very intimately connected,^ as " son of Itti-Bel," " temple
of Bel," " in Nippur," are written together without this separating line.^ Titles are
not considered to stand in such close connection with their antecedent proper names.
But, contrary to the view of the two French scholars, I maintain the identity of
Sargon and Shargdni-sliar-dli for the following reasons :
1. By the side of the long names of kings and private individuals we find — at
least in the last two thousand five hundred years of Babylonian history — abbreviated
forms in use. The lists of kings and the contract tablets, not to mention other pas-
sages, furnish ample proof. Cf. e. g. Ki-an (List b ") with Ki-an-ni-bi (List a, Eev.) ;
Kir-gal (List b) with Kir-gal-dara-bar ; A-dara (List b) with A-dara-kalam-ma ;
Bibe (List b) with Bi-be-ia-sM'^ (PI. 2G, No. 70) ; Kab-U~ia abilshu sha Tab-ni-e-a;'
with Kdbti-ildni-MarduTi abil-sJm sha Na'bu-tah-ni-u-sur,'^ among hundreds of similar
examples.^ It is therefore highly probable that at some future time we shall find
the abbreviated form Shargani even on Sargon's own monuments.
2. It was especially to be expected in the case of a king famous above all others,
and who so early became the hero of popular story, that the longer name should so ^
be abbreviated in the mouth of the people, and, finally, when it had ceased to be
intelligible, explained after the method of 'folk etymology'," as Sharru-Jcenu, "the
true king." Moreover, Pinches '" has pointed out, by comparison of Sumer. Jcurgina =
Assyr. TcurTianCi, gislikin = TcishTcanu, that the sign GI {ge) was originally pronounced
as ga, and that the Hebr. pJ")P represents this older pronunciation.^^
' In this respect the writer of the stele de Zohah is freer. Cf., however, sha duppa, which is always written on
one line even in the Sargon inscriptions from Nippur and in that of the king of Guti.
^ Cf. Pi. 1, 1. 3, 11, 24; PI. 3, 1. 1, 3, 11, 13, 33 ; PI. 3, No. 3, 1. 1 ; No. 4, 1. 1, 3.
' Winckler, Unters., p. 146, col. I, 4. For List a, cf. ibid., p. 14.5.
* Hilprecht, " Die Erganzung der Namen zweier Kassitenkonige," in Z. A. VIII, in print.
'" Strassmaier, Nabon. 133, 4.
* Strassmaier, Nabon. 183, 4. Cf. Peiser, Aus dem Babylonisehen BeeUsUben I, p. 11.
'The same principle of abbreviating names in everyday use occurs among nearly all ancient nations. Cf. e. g.,
Erman, ^gypten und ^ggptisches Leben im Altertum, p. 333 ; also the Hebrew dictionaries ; Fick, Die griechischen Per-
sonnenamen ; O. Crusius, Neue Jalirbucher, 1891, pp. 385-394 : "Die Anwendung von VoUnamen und Kurznamen bei
derselben Person." For the last two references I am indebted to my friend and colleague. Prof. W. A. Lamberton.
' Shargani, " the powerful." See p. 18, note 4.
' Hommel, Oeseh., p. 301.
'» P. S. B. A., VII, p. 67 seq.
" Cf. Hommel, I. c, p. 303.
18 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIOlsS
3. It is absolutely impossible to regard Sargon, father of Naram-Sin, as
"perhaps an invention of legend."^ But were he one of the best known and
mightiest rulers of the olden time," it was to be expected that some monuments of
his would be found in the thorough exploration of the ruins of the temple at Nippur,
where the greatest number of texts of his time ' ever found has been brought to
light. Where inscriptions of his less known son I^arfim-Sin, and of the hitherto
altogether unknown Alusharshid, have been discovered, it was a pnori probable that
inscriptions of 81iargina= 81iargena= Sliargdni{a) would also come to light.
Therefore the very absence of the name in the inscriptions there discovered is, in
itself, a proof that the ancient king whose name commences with Shargdm, and who
is represented by six inscriptions, is no other than Sargon, the father of Naram-Sin.
From this it follows naturally that the later Shargma was merely an abbreviation of
8hargdni-sliar-d It.
According to Oppert, the name signifies " mighty is the king of the city." *
There were also found in Nippur two brick stamps of Naram-Sin, son of Sargon
1. Both contain the same legend. The moulds, however, that were used in making
them differ slightly in size and shape. The inscription reads: 1. ^^"J^ardm-^^'^Sm
2. hdni 3. hU ^'■"Bel, " Naram-Sin, builder of the temple of Bel." If we may base
an argument on the place in which the stamps were found, as to the location of
Naram-Sin's building, we might conclude that he built a shrine immediately on the
canal south from the Ziqqurratu, whilst his father conhned himself in his building
to the east side of the temple platform. In any case, from the contents of the
' Winckler, Oeseh., p. 39.
" As is proved by the inscriptions of Nabflna'id, wliere he is called "Icing of Baljylon ", by the "Legend of Sar-
gon," the Tablet of Omens IV R. 34, and Uie mention of his name in the List V R. 44, 18, a, b. Hommel, who
reads erroneously Lugal-girintm {I. c, pp. 301, 307, note 4) in the last quoted passage, distinguishes Sargon of the list
asSargonll, c. 2000 B.C., from tlve ancient Sargon L His arguments are not convincing (cf. also Winckler, f/ft<«rs., p. 4.5,
note 2). It is especially "the historical background of the work "—the mention of Elam, Guti, etc., at such an early
period, which is the most valuable evidence for the high antiquity and reliability of the statements contained in the
astrological work. Cf. my remarks in connection with the inscriptions of the king of Guti and Alusharshid.
» Six inscriptions of Sliargani-shar-ali, two of Naram-Sin, and sixty-one inscribed vases (or fragments) of
Alusharshid.
* Z. A. Ill, p. 124. Cf. V R. 41, 29 a. b.: shar-ga-nu = dannu. Sharganu is a noun formation in an (Delitzsch,
Qram., I 65, No. 35) from a root sharagu, which seems to mean " to be powerful, mighty." Cf. the Hebr. proper name
J"?'. Likewise the names Bingani-shar-ali &nA Alusharshid contain the formative element alu,. There are reasons
for identifying this alu (Alu) with Aluki, used as an ideogram for "Baljjlon " by Nebuchadrezzar II (misunderstood
by Delitzsch, Worterhuch, p. 6). Cf. Hilprecht, The Sunday School Times, 1893, No. 20, p. 306 seq. Nebucliadrezzar
uses even mahazu alone (urhs) for "Babylon." Cf. e. g.Y R. 34 (Z. A. 11, p. 142-44), col. 1, 13: zanan mahazi.
"to adorn the City" (i. e. Babylon, not "die Stadte," Winckler in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 2, p. 39). For the
use of Alu without ki, cf. below Kish (Kishshatu).
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUB. 19
inscriptions of Sargon and N'aram-Sin it follows that the dominions of both included
Nippur.^
The list of ninety-two garments, PI. 6, was found near the inscriptions of Narum-
Sin. As it is written in Semitic (cf. 1. 6, rahcUum), and as, paleographically, there is
no objection to svich a conclusion, it belongs probably to Naram-Sin, or, in any case, to
one of the earliest Semitic kings of Babylonia.
In this connection, I call attention to the interesting and important fact that
the fragment of another vase (or probably of several) was discovered in the same
deep-lying stratum as the inscriptions of Sargon and Alusharshid, and close by them.
This fragment ■ contains the statement that " jE'rt-^e(men)-wa, patesi^ of Shirpurla,"
presented the vase to Bid of Nippur. When to this we add that a vase of Naram-
Sin,* and another of Alusharshid, as I have been informed, was found in Tello, we may
safely conclude : 1. That the dominion of Sargon, ' Naram-Sin and of their immediate
successors (or predecessors' ) extended also over the whole of South Babylonia '^
(at any rate, as far as Shirpurla '). 2. That the chronology of the oldest Semitic
rulers of Babylonia is approximately the same'^ as that of the earliest patesis of
Shirpurla. 3. That the " kings of Shirpurla " are earlier than Sargon (or Alusharshid ^).
It was apparently Sargon I or Alusharshid who put an end to the independence of
the kingdom of Shirpurla. This is not the place for a detailed statement of all my
reasons. They will be found in full elsewhere.
To the early Semitic rulers of Babylonia already known must now be added, in
consequence of the discoveries at ISTippur, King UEU-MU-USH, as his name
is written. Not less than sixty-one fragments of different vases of his have
been excavated from the temple.
As to the material of the vases cf. Table of Contents. The fact that they were
found close to the monuments of Sargon, that like them they are written in Semitic,
that the phraseology of PI. 4, 1. 11, 12 is very similar to lines 6, 7 of the vase inscrip-
' Cf. above, p. 15, note 5, and p. 35, note 3.
» It will be published in Vol. I, Part 3.
' I hold that the change of the title of lugal into paiesi in the case of the princes of Shirpurla is an indication of
their political dependence (Hommel, I. c, p. 396). Jensen's view (Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, pp. 6-8) is some-
what different.
* According to Oppert. Cf. Hommel, Geseh., pp. 399, note 1, 309.
* See my remarks in connection with the texts of Alusharshid.
* Cf. Hommel, I. c, pp. 396, 311.
' Winckler's suggestion that Shirpurla is not identical with the modern Tello or part of these ruins iGeteh., pp.
24, 31, note 1, 44, 336), but that it lay in North Babylonia, is quite improbable, to me even impossible.
» In this I slightly differ from Hommel (J,, c, p. 396), who places Sargon and NaramSin a little later than the
oldest patesis of Shirpurla.
20 OLD BABYLONIAN INSORIPTIOKS
tion of Karam-Sin, that paleographically they show the characteristic features of the
inscriptions of Sargon and his son, all this points to the first half of the fourth mil-
lennium as the approximate date when they were written. As the language of the
inscriptions is Semitic, I regard the name of the king also as Semitic and read ten-
tatively Alu-usliarshid,^ i. e., "He (some deity) founded the city."^
The discovered inscriptions of this king may be classed in four groups, consist-
ing of thirteen, eleven, six and three lines respectively. Only three of the three line
legends^ have been preserved intact. Though not a single complete text of the six-
line insciiptions has been excavated, yet the faint traces to be seen in the third-line
of PI. lY, ]^o. 13, and the space left for the restoration of the text, justify my read-
ing of PI. 5, ^o. 6, 1. 1-3. The fragment reproduced on PI. 5, ^o. 10, is the only
remnant of an eleven-line inscription found at Nippur. It is in all respects simi-
lar to the thirteen-line inscriptions, with this difference only that 1. 11, 12 of the
latter, in namrak Elamti *', were omitted. The inscription of thirteen lines has been
i-econstructed from eleven fragments, three of which (PI. Ill, Fragm. 8891, 8892,
a, b) belonged to a large dolomite vase and formed the basis of my text. Eighteen
fragments of all the excavated vases may confidently * be referred to this group. The
long inscription, of which some of the shorter ones are possibly abbreviations,^ reads :
1. A-na 2. ''" B&l 3. Alu-usharshid 4. shar 5. Kishshatu 6. %-nu 7. Elamtu^'^
8. u 9. Ba-ra-'-se^' 10. intra 11. in nam-ra-ak'^ VI. Elamti^' 13. iddin (A-MU-
' Cf. Brunnow, I. c, 5033, 5068.
^ Cf. Hilpreclit, Z. A. VII, p. 315, note 1, and Pinches, TM Academy, September 5, 1891, p. 199. Even if the name
be transliterated Urumush, it may be Semitic. In this case the Orchamus of Ovid (ifetam., 4, 212) offers itself for com-
parison.
' In spite of their identical contents I reproduced two of them (PI. 5, Nos. 7 and 8), because of the slight differ-
ence in the form of the characters USII and sharru, and because we do not possess a superabundant supply of texts
dating from that ancient period to wliich they belong. The sign published on PI. 5, No. 9, and resembling the Old
Babylonian character for ilu, "god," is found on the bottom of a third vase of the three-line group, and is, no doubt,
merely a "trade-mark."
* I include here only those fragments of which portions of 1. 5-13 have been preserved. Some of the other frag-
ments, however, probably belong to the same group.
' Necessary because of limited space.
« This word has been variously translated. Tiele {Qesch., p. 115) and others before and since changed namrak into
Apirak, a city mentioned on the tablet of omens, col. II, 12-14. Ilommel ( GticU., pp. 279, 309) translates it " polished
work," wliilst Winckler (Oesch., p. 38) is content to render it simply "work." But all this is mere guesswork.
To my knowledge, the word has been found thus far only in three passages, in the above text of Alusharshid, on the
vase of Naram-Sin and in Gudea B, col. 6, 66. In the last passage we read 1. 64-69 : ffi«A KU ^ruAn-sha-an Nima «
mu-sig nam-raaga-WUnairMn-gir-Bu-ra E-ninnu-a mu-na-ni-tur, "With (his) weapon he smote the city of Anshan in
Elam, brought its spoil into Enianfl to Ningirsu." Cf. Jensen (K. B. Ill, Part 1, pp. 38, 89) on this passage. The
latter's hesitation about the reading A^ima m, "Elam" (exactly so written above), and the meaning of namrak is
unnecessary. As early as eight years ago, Amiaud, with his wonted insight, conceived the correct meaning of the
word (Z. K. I, p. 249). Whether it is Sumerian or Semitic remains to be determined. As we do not possess long
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 21
SHUB)/ " Alusharshid, king of Kishshatu, presented (it) to Bel from the spoil of
Elam, when he had subjugated Elam and Bara'se."
The inscription is of historical importance. We learn from it, that King Alu-
sharshid subdued Elam and the country of Bara'se, doubtless in close proximity .
to it,- and that in the booty he carried off to Babylonia a number of costly
marble vases. Part of them he dedicated to Bel of Nippur, and part, perhaps, to
Shamash of Sippara, ^ after first having engraved upon most^ of them in beautiful
clear-cut characters his name and the occasion of the gift. The inscription suffices
to show that Alusharshid was a mighty ruler, who in courage and adventurous spirit
was not second to N'aram-Sin. But it also offers most welcome material for deter-
mining the extent of the dominion of the oldest Semitic rulers. It furnishes addi-
tional support to Tide's view (Gesch., p. 114), and at the same time proves that
Winckler's conception of the beginning of the JSTorth Babylonian history and of the
extent of Sargon's empire (OescJi., p. 38) is incorrect. Winckler proceeds upon the
erroneous supposition that the deeds of Sargon, as reported in the tablet of omens and
in the "legend," are purely legendary. Hommel also (GescJi., p. 306 seq.) is ham-
pered by similar prejudices. That jSTarum-Sin was in the possession of South Baby-
lonia is demonstrated by his building in Nippur (bdni hit Bel), and by his vase
found in Tello, and is furthermore established beyond all doubt by his successful
operations in Magan,'' which, according to Winckler, was situated on the eastern
boundary of Arabia. A vase of the Semitic king of Guti,^ belonging to this same
ancient period, which was probably carried by a victorious Babylonian king as trophy
to Sippara, points to the extension of the power of the oldest North Babylonian rulers
descriptions of campaigns in Sumerian, it cannot be surprising tliat tlie word does not occur otlierwise in Sumerian
inscriptions, wliicli deal mostly witli religious affairs and accounts of buildings. In favor of a Semitic etymology, to
which I incline, it may be said : (1) That tlie word " looks very much like an original ^formation of a root I^D "
(Jensen) and (2) that it is twice found in the Semitic inscriptions of the oldest North Babylonian rulers.
• It is not to be read a-mu-rii and to be derived from aTO«ru with the meaning of " ersehen" (Hommel, Oescli.,
p. 303), i. «., "to dedicate" (Pinches, Trans. 8. B. A. VIII, p. 350). Cf. Amiaud, Z. A. II, p. 296, and Jensen in
Schrader's K B. Ill, Part 1, p. 26, note *". For ihub = nculanu = nadu (mj, cf. ni;, "gift," Ezek. xvi. 33), cf. Tall-
quist, BdbylonUche Sehenkungsbriefe, p. 9.
^ Nothing more definite can be said at present. It is, perhaps, to be read Para'se. Cf. the name of the mountain
Ba-H-ir {stele de ZoMb I, col. I, 7), which Scheil (I. c, p. 104) correctly identified with the mountain Padid^ir
(Shamshi-Bamman II, col. II, 7).
' According to Pinches Jensen, inscriptions of Alusharshid have also been found in Sippara. Cf. T/ie Academy,
September 5, 1891, p. 199, P. S.
* A number of vases of the same high workmanship and found among them were without inscriptions. Cf.
below, p. 30.
' I. R. 3, No. VII, 1. 7, namrak Magan, "plunder of Magan."
« Cf. p. 12 seq.
22 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
further northward. The inscriptions of Alusharshid testify to his supremacy over
the South/ and to his victories in tlie East and I^forth-East of Babylonia. In view of
all this, I regard it as impossible to question the historical character of the statements
of the tablet of omens relative to JS^aram-Sin. Since we know that about that time
a Semitic population dwelt in the northern and northeastern countries of Guti and
Lulubi,^ whose kings wrote inscriptions on rocks and vases in a dialect entirely
identical with the Babylonian, it can no longer seem strange that ]^aram-Sin took
the Semitic king H'tsh-Rammdn, of Apirak, prisoner. It is evident, however, that
Apirak, which by its termination forcibly lecalls names like A(E)shnunak,^ is to be
sought in the I*N^orth-East' of Babylonia rather than in the South. '' If the credibility
of the tablet of omens is therefore established as far as IS^aram-Sin is concerned, we
are no longer at liberty to call in question what it relates concerning Sargon I, unless
more solid objections than have heretofore been raised, be brought against it. With
Tiele, therefore, I regard as facts what Winckler describes as fiction, viz., that Sar-
gon I subjugated nearly the whole world known to him, or in other words, "the four
quarters of the earth." "^
But how is it that whilst Sargon always bears the title sharru dannu shar Agade
or dannu sliar Agade or only sliar Agade,' both in the legend and in his own inscrip-
' Including Lagash. Cf. p. 19.
^ This fact argues in favor of a migration of the Semites into Babylonia from the North. Cf the "legend of Sar-
gon," according to which his uncle dwelt in the mountains, and he himself was carried down the river in an ark made
of reed. Cf also Winckler, Oeseh., p. 141.
' Pognon found there Semitic inscriptions written by patesis of Ashnunak. Nothing can be said with certainty
as to the exact date of these texts, but they seem to belong to the second millennium B. C. Cf Pognon, Quelques rois
du pays d' Achnounnak, read at the Academic des inscriptions et belles lettres, March 18, 1892. On this country see fur-
ther Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 230 seq.; Kossder, p. 60 ; and also Jensen in Schrader's K. B., Part I, p. 137, note".
* Hommel is on the right track {Oesch., p. 310, note 1). His reading A-ma-rak, however, has neither support nor
probability.
' Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 231, "ziemlich sudlich eu suchen."
' I regard also Sargon's campaign in the West, to the Mediterranean Sea and to Cyprus, as historic facts. The
cylinder of Naram-Sin's servant found at Cyprus, and now in the Metropolitan Museum of New York (cf Sayce,
Tra7is. 8. B. A. V, p. 441 seq.), has, however, no direct bearing upon the whole question. Through the kindness of
Prof Isaac Hall, Curator of the Museum, I obtained an accurate Impression of the cylinder, to which, for paleographic
reasons (observe, e. g., the form of the character ra), I cannot assign an earlier date than c. 2000-1500 B. C. The
pictures on it also point to a more recent date. But the cylinder is undoubtedly no modern forgery (Hommel, I. c,
p. 309).
' NabQna'id calls him, for apparent reasons, sliar BaUli. It is in itself not impossible that there were kings of
Babylon at some time in that ancient period. For the place where the vase of NaramSin was found by the French
expedition, the tablet of omens (I, 7-11, cf. my restoration of this passage below, p. 26) and the occasional mentioning
of Babylon (under another name) in the Sumerian inscriptions of the kings and patesis of Shirpurla clearly show that
Babylon not only existed at this early lime and belonged to Sargon's kingdom, but that it even had already obtained
considerable prominence (cf below, p. 26). Cf. however, Winckler, Unters., p. 76 seq., and Lehmann. ShamasAshum.
ukin, p. 96, note 4.
CHIEFLY TEOM NIPPUR. 23
tions, his immediate successor, ]^aram-Sin, styles himself sliar Tcibrat arlaH, and
Alusharshid and M A-Ai^-ISH-TU-SU ' even shar Kishshatu? This question is
closely connected with the other, What do the last two titles mean ? It is impossible
for me to enter here into as full a discussion of this question as its importance de-
mands. I therefore content myself for the present with giving the results of my
investigations. As I am now considering the meaning of these titles in the earliest
times only, I iiatui-ally exclude their use with the later Babylonian and with the
Assyrian kings."
I. As to the Old Babylonian title, sTiar Kishshatu, we have been accustomed to
follow Winckler, ^ and to regard it as simply the equivalent of the later shar hish-
shati, "king of the world." ^ This identification, however, is not proved. On the
other hand, it is worthy of note, (1) that supposing Alusharshid lived after l!f arum-
Sin, and even supposing further that he founded a new dynasty, it would still be
matter for astonishment that he should exchange a title, that was not only satisfactory
to ]S"aram-Sin, known as a great conqueror, but was in itself sufficiently significant,
for the synonymous shar Tcishshati, "king of the world;"' (2) that no later Baby-
lonian king, before Merodachbaladan I, not even the powerful Hammurabi, bears this
title, though many of them apply to themselves the title shar hibrat arha'l ; (3) that
Winckler's theory, which sees in Harran the original seat of the sharrH Mshshati, is
improbable for the later Babylono-Assyrian time, and altogether out of question for
'Winckler, A. K, No. 67. Paleographic reasons, the Semitic language of the inscription and the title shar Kish-
shatu, establish for this king a date not only earlier than 2000 B. C. (Winckler, Gesch., p. 155), but even earlier than
3000 B. C. He is to be classed with Alusharshid. The white marble duck (Norris, On the Assyrian and Babylonian
Weifjhti, PI. 2, No. 3), bearing the name of Nahu-shum-libur shar Kishshatu, remains without consideration here, as I
do not feel at liberty to base any paleographic conclusions on the cuneiform text as it is published there. .
'I hope to treat the whole question in another place. That we may understand correctly the meaning of this
title in Assyrian, the following points must be examined more carefully : (1) Is the title simply to be regarded as bor-
rowed from Babylonia (cf. patesi, temple names, etc.) and extended to cover Assyrian conditions, so that only the
name is Babylonian, while its semasiological development is essentially Assyrian ? (2) Or, in using the title, did the
Assyrians claim the same right over the same district as the Babylonians, i. e., suppose that in Babylonia a claim
was thereby expressed to Harran (Winckler), did the Assyrians by tlieir use of tlic phrase make exactly the same
claim upon this city ? (3) Or is there no connection between the Assyrian and the Babylonian title ? These questions
have hitherto not been answered sufficiently.
^ Mitteilungen des Akademiseh-Orientalischen Vereins zu Berlin I, p. 14.
*Cf. Jensen in Schrader's K. B. HI, Part 1, p. 196, note 4.
'If we may draw any conclusion from the later customs of Babylonian and Assyrian kings, we rather expect
that in the above given case, Alusharshid, whose empire was scarcely smaller than that of Naram-Sin, according to
our present knowledge, would have been particularly anxious to adhere to a title which was connected by the Baby-
Ionian people with the name of a very powerful ruler, and regarded by the later kings as especially important. And
vice versa, if Alusharshid lived before Sargon and had founded a sharrut Mshshati, "kingdom of the world," it would
be strange that Naram-Sin should have used shar kibrat arba'i instead, if the other title meant exactly the same.
24 OLD BABYLONIAK INSCRIPTIONS
the earliest period,^ I therefore would propose another explanation of the title,
viz., to regard sTiar Kishshatu (or shar Kish) as identical with sliar K'ish, " king of
Kish."- In other words, I infer from this title that there was a kingdom of the city
of Kish similar to those of Shirpurla, Agade, etc., at the earliest time of the Baby-
lonian history. Two of its rulers are so far known ; both wrote Semitic, and one of
them at least possessed South Babylonia and defeated Elam. Whether these kings
lived after the dynasty of Sargon, or whether thej preceded it and were dethroned
by Sargon, will be considered below. At all events, it will be well to separate the
kings of Kish'* from those of Agade. There is much in favor of the view that
even in the Assyrian mind^ the title shar hishsliati was originally connected with the
possession of Kish, where Tiglath-Pileser III offered sacrifices to the gods (II R.
67, 11).
II. But what does shar hihrat arha'i mean in the oldest Babylonian history ?
After Sargon had subjugated the Elaraites," thus fixing the natural eastern boundary
of his projected great empire, he marched to the West, " subdued ' the land of the
West,' conquered the four quarters of the world." The last part of the previous sen-
tence, literally quoted from the tablet of omens, can in itself be interpreted as
meaning (a) that " the four quarters of the world " lay still beyond " the land of the
West," and therefore were geographically distinct from it, or (6) that the conquest
' Cf. also A. Mez, Oeschiehte der Stadt Harran in Mesopotamien, p. 27.
' As I remarked above, I cannot state all the reasons for my theory here. At present it may suffice to give the fol-
lowing : (1) Cf. my restoration of IV R. 34, 7-11 below. (2) Cf. Delitzsch, Puradies, p.218 seg., where it is stated that
the Semitic Babylonians and Assyrians wrote this city also Ki-shu (and Ki-e-tsh, Brit. Mus., 82-8-16, 1, col. I, 44, pub-
lished by S. A. Smith, Miscellaneous Assyrian Texts, PI. 26 ; cf. also the present volume, PI. 8, No. 14, 1. 7), Biii^Kish-
sha-tu, "according to a small unpublished vocabulary" (cf. Paradies, p. 230). (3) Cf. also the name of the ancient
king, Abil-Kishki, known from the fragment of a Babylonian chronicle {Trans. 8. B. A. Ill, 372), and to whom
Delitzsch (Oesch., p. 73) correctly assigns the fourth millennium.
■' I afterwards found that Jensen (Schrader's K. B. Ill, Parti, p. 202, note), independently of me, translated "king
of Kish" in the inscription of Manishtusu (Wiuckler, A. K, No. 67). His reasons for so doing and his conclusions
are both unknown to me.
*The facts that Rammaa-nirari, who defeated the Babylonian king, Nazi-Maruttash, near Kar-Isbtar, is the first
Assyrian ruler who bears the title shar kishshati (in the inscription of his son, Shalmaneser I, I R. 6, No. IV, 1. 2) ;
and further, that Tukulti-Ninib I, his grandson, who also claims the title, must have been in the possession of Kish,
as he had captured even Babylon {R. P.\ Vol. V, p. Ill, col. IV, 2 ««?.); and last, that neither Ashurdan I, nor
Mutakkil-Nusku, nor even Ashur-rgsh-ishi has this title (III R. 3, No. 6, 1. 1 and 8), deserve especial attention in con-
nection with my hypothesis. Afterwards the ancient meaning of the title was lost, and shar Kishshati, "king of
Kish," became shar kishshati, "king of the world " (which may, however, have been the very first meaning of the
title before it was connected with Kish ; cf. the development of the meaning shar kibrat arba'i).
* IV R.^ 34, col I, 1-3. I regard the arrangement of the individual deeds, related in the tablet of omens, as chron-
ological. Among other reasons the account of Sargon's three expeditions against the West favors this view. It was
also natural that the king, before marching to the West, should protect himself in the rear by subjugating the Elamites
in the Bast, so that during his long absence no danger might threaten Babylonia from that quarter.
CHIEFLT TROM NIPPUR. 25
of " the four quarters of the world " is identical with his conquest of " the land of
the West," or (c) that the conquest of " the four quarters of the world " followed as
a result upon his subduing the West. In opposition to the first view is the fact that
a kingdom of " the four quarters of the world " in the far West is nowhere else
mentioned, that the phrase stands without the usual determinative m-itu, nlu, etc.,
and that this title was claimed by Babylonian kings even when they made no con-
quests in the West.' The identification of the " four quarters of the world " with
"the land of the West" needs no refutation, as it has never been advanced, and
in fact has no support. We can, therefore, only regard the conquest of '* the four
quarters of the world " as the result of Sargon's victories in the West, so that by the
use of the title the claim is made to a quasi- world wide dominion,- as has been cor-
rectly stated by Lehmann (Z. c, p. 94). And indeed, Sargon, after having conquered
the West, was fully justified in the Babylonian sense of the word " world," in thus
designating his large dominion. For, in order to subjugate the West, he was obliged,
because of the Arabian desert, to march victoriously first to the ^N^orth, then to the
West and finally southward. The enemies in the East having been previously sub-
dued, and South Babylonia being also brought under his sceptre,' he could indeed
call a kingdom his own which was enclosed on all sides by natural boundaries.*
The city which had obtained the hegemony through Sargon's deeds was Agade.''
For he calls it " my city " (" Legend," 1. 26). It is the city in which he was shut up
during the insurrection against him (IV E.', 34, col. I, 37). And furthermore, in
all his inscriptions as yet found, he calls himself "king of Agade." But, if I
understand the tablet of omens correctly, Agade does not appear to have been the
capital of the empire of the four quarters of the world, as one would naturally have
supposed. After Sargon had subjugated "the whole world,'' he regarded as his next
work the building of a capital worthy of this grand empire. The account of this
important work is evidently related in IV E.", 34, 1. 7-10, a passage" unfortunately
much mutilated and heretofore entirely misunderstood. After a careful comparison
' Against Tiele, Oesch., p. 78.
'Tide (,1. c, pp. 73, 78) concedes the possibility, indeed even the probability of this explanation, but adds, that
the title may also have had an entirely different meaning (p. 73). But what else could it have meant with Sargon I?
'This is evident from his building in Nippur, and from the fact that even his son, who was less prominent than
his father, extended his influence to Shirpurla. Cf. also the express statements of the "Legend."
*The Elamite mountains on the east, the mountains of Armenia on the north, the Mediterranean Sea (and
Cyprus) on the west and the Persian Gulf on the south.
*In spite of all that has been said in support of Agane, I regard this reading as improbable (cf. my remarks on
Gande, p. 28). Lehmann's statements Q. c, p. 73) prove nothing against Agade. More as to this in another place.
•For recent translations cf. Hommel, Qeseh., p. 305, and Winckler in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 102 «eq.
26 OLD BABYLONIAN IXSCKIPTIONS
of the text as given in the first and second editions of lY E./ I transliterate and
restore the passage as follows : Shar-ge-na sha ina SHIR an-ni-i Kisli-sliu [^'"]
Bdbilu"' i-lshu-y slium-ma epre sha ^* shal-la hnhu TU-NA^^ is-suhu-ma .....
[ina Ume?]-tu A-ga-de'' cilu i-hu-s7iu-ma [UB-DA]'^ -*'' slium-sM im-bu-u , . . .
[ina lib'} bi u-sJie-slii-bu, "Sargon, who under this omen brought sorrow upon Kish
and Babylon, tore away the earth of ... . and built a city in the vicinity of (or
"after the pattern of"?) Agade, called its name 'place (city) of the world,' and
caused the inhabitants of Kish and Babylon (?) to dwell there."
I infer from this (a) that Kish and Babylon existed as prominent cities already
in the time of Sargon I, as this great ruler deemed it necessary to render them harm-
less ; (&) that the dynasty of Kish was overthrown by Sargon I," and that therefore
Alusharshid and Manishtusu are to be placed before Sai-gon I;' (c) that the reason
why the vases of Alusharshid, all badly broken, were found lying close by the com-
paratively well-preserved monuments of Sargon, but not by those of ]S^aram-Sin, is
that Alusharshid apparently ruled before Sargon, not after l!^aram-Sin.
The question arises. Which city corresponds in later times to that built by Sargon
" in the vicinity (?) of Agade," and with which the title " king of the four quarters
of the world " * was associated ? There are reasons for identifying it with Kutha,
as Winckler" does. But stronger arguments seem to point to Ursagkalama'" with its
famous temple, " the mountain of the world," (always mentioned in close connection
with Kish, the probable ' seat of the sliavrat Jcishshati), as being identical with "the
city of the world " ^' founded by Sargon I.
' This important text seems to have suffered still more since its first publication by George Smith in IV R.', as a
comparison with Pinches' new edition clearly shows. Had all the differences between the first and second editions of
the text, brought about by a decomposition of the tablet, been carefully noted, it would have been of great value, as
the first edition is not always accessible to students.
2 Cf. V R. 12, No. 6, 50 ; II R. 52, 67 c ; Ki-shu (cf above, p. 24, note 2). Perhaps ki is wanting, and u, " and,"
is to be substituted.
3 This is the most probable reading, according to the traces in IV R.'^. Cf K. 3657, col. I, 9 (isJiuush), and IV
R.' l.*42, a, "the sickness which brings woe upon the country" (i-ash-sha 87iu).
* These five characters are not quite clear to me, though it is evident that Sargon puriwsely destroyed something.
'The two wedges beginning the character UB are clearly to be seen in IV R.', and the last two wedges of DA
still remain in IV R.^ More than two characters cannot have stood there. For the meaning of UBDA, without
arba'i, cf Jensen, Kosmologie, p. 167.
*For various other reasons the city kingdom of Kish cannot be placed after Sargon I.
' Paleographical reasons also favor this chronological arrangement of the two dynasties. I reached my conclusion
after the plates in question were printed. PI. 4-5 and TII-V are to be placed before those of Sargon I and Naram-Sin.
'It is quite possible that monuments of Sargon may yet be found, on which he calls himself " king of the four
quarters of the earth."
»«. g., Ge$eh., pp. 31, 33.
'•For this reading cf. Jensen in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 23, note 5.
"Cf Winckler's remarks, I. c, p. 33, in connection with " Oharsagkalama."
CHIKFLT FROM NIPPUR. 27
THE DYNASTY OF ISIN.^
Three kings of this dynasty were among the builders of the temple at Nippur,
Ur-Ninib, Bur-Sin I, and Ishme-Dagdn.- Specimens of brick legends of the latter
will be given in the second half of this volume. The fragment of a stone pub-
lished on PI. 9, No. 17, is unfortunately so small that we learn nothing new
from it.
More important are the inscriptions of both the other rulers, PI. 10 and 11.
They are taken from bricks which, at the time of their excavation, were out of
their original place. These formed rather part of a platform of the Ziqqurratu con-
structed 01' restored by Mili-Shikhu, who took them from the ruined walls of his
predecessors, as old but still serviceable material for his own work. Various bricks
of Ur-Ninib have thus been preserved, all with the same inscribed (not stamped)
legend. Of Bur-Sin, on the other hand, only a single brick, broken in two pieces,
has as yet been found.
Ur-Ninib, " Man (servant) of God Ninib," is the king hitherto wi'ongly tran-
scribed as Gamil-Ninib.^ His inscription, here published, is identical with IV
R.- 35, No. 5. The fragment of a brick from Nippur, I E. 5, No. XXIV, erroneously
ascribed to Ishme-Dagrm, is obviously the lower half of the same legend. In
addition to the complete name of the ruler, the new text otfers the correct reading of
1. 4, na-gid,* i. e., rmkidu, Hebr. ipj, " shepherd " (of Ur), and of 1. G, mi-shu-il, " he
who delivers the commands " (of Eridu).
Bur-Sin I, so designated by me to distinguish him from another king of the
same name," Bur-Sin II of the second dynasty of Ur," is a new king of the dynasty
of Isin. The phraseology of his inscription is very similar to that of Ur-Ninib and
Libit-Anunit' (I E. 5, No. XVIII), and thereby assures the correct i-eading of several
characters of the latter inscription. The first sign of 1. 4 is not da (Winckler) but
mgar^ (identical with Briinnow, I. c. 1024), and the second sign in 1. 8 is probably
' Not Niiin, as has been generally read— last by Delitzsch, Oeschichte Babyloniens und Anyriens, p. 79. Cf. the
hymn 80, 7-19, 136, 1. 3, 4, published by Bezold in Z. A. IV, p. 430.
' PL 9, No. 17, has been placed before Plates 10 and 11 only to save space. Ishme-Dagan was the last king of the
dynasty of Isin.
' Cf. Hilprecht in Z. A. VII, p. 315, note 1.
* For this Semitic loan word of the Sumerian language, found also in the inscriptions of Qudea (F. col. IV, 12),
cf. JensenZimmern in Z. A. Ill, 200, 208 uq. Cf. also Jensen in K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 4.
' Although always written with the other sign Bur (Brunnow, I. c, 9068).
• Cf. Plates 12, 13, and Vol. I, Part 2.
' According to Winckler in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 86, Libit-Ishtar.
' Cf. Jensen-Zimmern, Z. A. Ill, p. 199 uq.
28 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCKlPTIONS
m(, not ash. L. 3-7 in the iiiscrii^tion of Bur-Sin I are of special interest. Tliey
read : 3. {7igar Ug(?y-ga 4.. Uru7n'"-7na 5. gish-kin Urudug'"-ga M-bi-gi 6. m mi-a-
tum-ma - 1. Urug^'-ga, " the powerful shepherd ^ of Ur, the restorer of the oracle
tree^ of Eridu, the lord who delivers the commands of Erech."
GANDE AND THE CASSITE DYNASTY.
A number of inscribed objects excavated in Nippur bear the name of a king''
who has been transliterated Oar-de (?) by Pinches." As I remarked in another
place," this transliteration is incorrect. For the first character of the gronp on PI. 14,
No. 23, 1. 2 b, is not the Old Babylonian sign for GAR,' but Gi^N.'' The second
character may be read either de or ne, the whole name therefore, either Oande or
Ganne. The former reading is the more probable, because the second character, out-
side of the purely Sumerian^" texts, is more frequently found with the syllabic value
de than ne."
The contents of the three inscriptions of Gande published on PI. 14 are iden-
tical. They read: 1. ""'''''J^n-Ul-la 2. lugal M-aga-ni Qan-de 3. a-mu-na-shub, "To
' Cf. Jensen, Z. A. I, p. 396, note 4.
' mi-a-tumma, corresponding to «»-sAm-j7 (Ur-Ninib, 1. 6), as turn, like il, is explained by abalu, "to bring,
to deliver." Cf. IVBJ 35, No. 6, 12, 13.
' Cf. ik-ka-ri Ba-U-i-lu " (Nebucliadrezzar II), shepberd of Babylon " (Abel-Winckler, KeilsehriftUxte, p. 33,
1. 19). Ingar — ikkaru, Hebrew 13K, is a Semitic word adopted by the Sumerian language (Zimmern, Babylonische
Buispsalmen, p. 5, note 1), and means "farmer," Landriiann (.JensenZinimern, in Z. A. Ill, p. 199 seq. ; Delitzsch,
Assyrisclies Worterbuch, pp. 400-403). In view of the principal occupations of the farmer— tilling of the ground and
stock-raising— the word occurs as a synonym either of irrishu, talm. XOnx (Z. A. HI, p. 200), or of naUdu, rid alpi
{Z. A., ibid.). Accordingly, it is to be translated either as " farmer " or lis "shepherd." The latter meaning is the
only possible one in the above-given passage, as the context and a comparison with Ur-Ninib, 1. 4^nagid Urum'^^-
ma, "shepherd of Ur'— clearly show. The same meaning is also to be preferred to Landmann (Jensen, in Schrader's
K B. Ill, Part 1, p. 59) in passages like Gudea F, col. Ill, 1. 14, where ingar stands parallel with uiul, sib and nagid,
all words for "shepherd."
* Cf. Jensen, Kosmolo'jie, pp. 99 ieq., 249, note.
» That the bearer of this name was a king is certain (against Pinches), notwithstanding the omission of the title.
Cf. Hilprecht, "Die Ergiinzung der Namen zweier Kassitenkijnige, " Z. A. VIII (In print).
^ The Academy, 1891, September 5, p. 199, a, b.
' Z. A. VII, p. 315, note 1.
' Amiaud et Mechineau, I. c, No. 103.
• Ibidem, No. 79, sign 5.
" To be understood in the sense established by Lehmann, Shamashshumukin, pp. 62-108.
" For this and other reasons I reject the reading Agane instead of Agade (= Akkadf in spite of Lehmann, Sha-
mcuhshumukm, p. 73). Cf. also Hommel, Oeseh., p. 302.
CHIKPLY FKOM NIPPUK. 29
Bel, his beloved lord, Gande has presented it." But who was this Gande who left
his name on a number of marble vases,^ on a large unhewn block of white marble,
on two others of i-eddish granite and on the edge of two door sockets belonging to
former Babylonian kings ? A due consideration of the following points will enable
us to answer the question.
1. The short inscription of Gande just translated is written not only on his own
monuments by this king, but is also found on the rough edges of a door socket of
Sargon I, and another of Bur-Sin XL Hence it follows, that Gande must have lived
after their time, i. e., after c. 2400 B. C.
2. On the other hand, it follows from the depth of the ijlace in which the stones
were found and also from the peculiar characters of the inscriptions (see below), that
Gande could not have ruled after Mili-Shikhu, or, as the immediate seven or eight
predecessors of the latter are known, not after c. 1240 B. C.
3. It is i-emarkable that Gande by two of his inscriptions characterizes door
sockets which had previously been presented to the temple as his own gifts. It is
in itself clear that these inscriptions cannot be regarded in the sense of inventory
labels, as they are sometimes found in connection with Egyptian antiquities. Only
one explanation seems possible, namely, that Gande was not a native king, but
invaded and conquered Babylonia and regarded the propei'ty of the temple in Nippur
as his legitimate spoil. As however he, with his victorious hordes, did not leave the
subjected country again, but usiu-ped the Babylonian throne, thereby becoming the
founder of a new dynasty, the conquered cities and temples became part of his new
empire, to which he now restored the trophies of his victory as his own personal gifts.
Had he left Babylonia, he certainly would have carried away the treasures of the
temple as spoil to his own country, just as Alusharshid and Naram-Sin did, after
they had conquered Elam and Magan, or Nebuchadrezzar I, alter the destruction of
Jerusalem.
4. This explanation of Gande is supported by the chai'acter of his inscribed
objects and by the peculiarity of their cuneiform writing. All his inscriptions are
carelessly executed and are engraved very shallowly ; indeed, those on the door
sockets and large blocks are only scratched in the unhewn stone. Besides, the char-
acters employed violate the laws which underlie the regular development of the
Babylonian cuneiform writing. They appear to have been cut by men unaccustomed
to use the chisel in writing, who, it is plain, had adopted the Babylonian
system of writing, even endeavoring to imitate the characters of a certain
period,^ but who were neither familiar with their original meaning, nor with the
' Cf. Vol. I, Part 2.
' Cf. e. g the characters of the inEcriptions of Ur-Nina, de Sarzec, Decouvertes, PI. 31, Na 1.
30 OLD BABYLONIAN IN8CKIPTI0NS
exact form then in use. The scribe regarded e. g. GAN (PI. 14, IsTo. 23) as the
doubled form of a certain sign resembling the reversed ancient SAG.^ For occasion-
ally he divides this character into halves, placing one after the other (PI. 14, No. 24,
25). The artistic execution of the vases themselves stands in striking contrast to
the rude appearance of the inscriptions on them and on the large stones. As a num-
ber of uninscribed vases of similar form and of the same skillful workmanship were
found together with those of Alusharshid, there is every reason to believe that
Gande's vases formed originally part of the former's gift to the temple, the more so
as they were found in close proximity to those of that very ancient king. Only the
unhewn blocks of marble and granite, apparently intended for door sockets, were
genuine gifts of Gande, probably brought from the Elamite mountains. From the
fact that the place occupied by the inscription was not polished or even smoothed,
we likewise infer that the scribes of this ruler had neither the artistic taste nor tech-
nical training of the Babylonian stonecutters.
5. The name Oande has not a Babylonian sound. Besides, it is sometimes
found abbreviated into Oan. This peculiarity of abbreviating names is characteris-
tic of the rulers of the second and third dynasties of Babylon, as is shown by com-
paring List b with List a and with the inscriptions of Bibeiashu.' Only one king
fulfills the requirements (viz., a foreigner, founder of a new dynasty, a prince whose
name begins with Oan, and who lived between c. 2400 and c. 1240 B. C). This is
Gandash, the first ruler of the Cassite dynasty, which occupied the throne of Baby-
lonia for five hundred and seventy-six years. Gande (otherw. Gan) is abbreviated
from Gandash ^ in the same way as Bibe from Bibeiashu.*
It is significant that, with the exception of fragment Brit. Mus. 84-2-11, 178
(see note 3), no monument of the founder of the Cassite dynasty and very few of its
other members have, up to the present, been found outside of Nippur. This latter was,
as I shall later show in detail, the very centre and stronghold of the Cassite dynasty.
It is not, therefore, accidental, that the representatives of this foreign house dedicated
so many valuable gifts to the temple of Bel in Nippur. By not paying the same hom-
age to Marduk of Babylon and his illustrious city, which Hammurabi^ had endeavored
to raise to the most prominent position in the political and religious life of the country,
' Amiaud et Mfichineau, I. c, No. 231.
' Cf. above, p. 17.
'Who again is identical witli the Gaddash of Brit. Mus. 84-2-11, 178 (Winck\eT, Vhters., p. 156, No. 6). Cf.
Hilprecht, Z. A. VII, p. 309 seg., especially note 4.
* Cf. Hilprecht, "Die Erganzung der Namen zweier Kassitenkonige " in Z. A. VIII (in print).
' It is worthy of notice, that not one votive object with an inscription of a ruler of the first or second dynasty of
Babylon has so far been found in Nippur. These kings concentrated their attention on the glorification of Babylon.
CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUR. 31
but by restoring the former glory of Ekur, the ancient national sanctuary in Nippur,
so deeply rooted in the hearts of the Babylonian people, and by stepping forward as
the champions of the sacred rights of " the father of the gods,"^ they were able to
bring about a reconciliation and a final melting together of the Cassite and Semitic
elements. Supported by the influential priesthood of Nippur and dreaded as daring
warriors by the discontented parties, the Cassites could mould and govern the desti
nies of Babylonia for nearly six hundred years, until finally they were overwhelmed by
new invasions from the East and by the great national uprising in the South, which
resulted in placing the native dynasty of Pashe on the throne of Babylon. The
essential results to be drawn from the fifty-five votive inscriptions of the Cassite
dynasty published on Plates 14-29, I have given in several articles in Zeitschrift
fur Assyriologie- and may therefore confine myself to the following points.
The insciiptions on PI. 8, No. 15, and PI. 21, No. 43, are written on the obverse
and reverse of a tablet in agate. The stone tells its own story. About 2750 B. C,
the patesi ^ of a city dedicated the tablet to the goddess Niuna or Ishtar " for the life
of Dungi, the powerful champion, king of Ur." Afterwards, possibly about 2285 B. C,
at the time of the Elamite invasion, when Kudur-Nankhundi laid hand on the temples
of Akkad and carried the image of the goddess Nana, into Elam, the tablet was also
taken away and remained in the possession of the enemies until c. 1300 B. C. Kuiigal-
zu (doubtless the second of the name*), after his conquest of Susa, brought it back
to Babylonia and presented it to Beltis of Nippur. For over three thousand years it
lay within the walls of Ekui-, until again it became the spoil of invaders of Nippur.
This time it was carried far away to the modern "^"'"Aharrh Perhaps a later shai'
kibrat arhaHm will take it back to the resurrected sanctuai'y of Nippur. Kuri-
galzu's inscription on this tablet is of historical importance, because, for the first
time, we learn from this king's own inscriptions of his successful campaign against
Elam,* in the course of which he conquered even Susa.'^ The cuneiform text reads :
1. Kurigalzu 2. shar Karuduniash 3. ekalla slia '''"■ Slidsha''' 4. slia Elamti'-'' 5. iJcshud-
ma 0. ana""BeUt (J^N-LIL) 7. heUishu 8. ana haldUshu 9. iUsh, "Kurigalzu, king
of Karuduniash, conquered the palace of Susa in Elam and presented (this tablet)
to Belit, his mistress, for his life."
' Inscription of Kadashman-Turgu, PI. 34, No. 63, 1. 1 and 2.
^ Cf. " Bibliography," II, 9, 11, 13.
' This word stood apparently in one of the lost lines at the lower end of the tablet.
* Cf. Pinches, "An Early Tablet of the Babylonian Chronicle," in R. P.', Vol. V, p. 109, col. Ill, 10-18.
' The earliest mention of Susa in the Babylonian cuneiform literature. Tlie absolute proof for the identity of
SAa»7ia with ShuM (IV R." 53, 46, b; II R. 48, 59, 6, and Delitzsch, Parodies, p. 336), ShilshanoT Shushun, is impossi-
ble at present. It seems, however, scarcely possible that ekalla sha Shasha »ha Elamti can be anything else than
dS';?3 -^m. m'3n wm (Dan. viii. 3). The name was probably pronounced 87id8ha(n). Cf also p. 13, note 1 (end).
32 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
Another inscription published on the same plate, Il^os, 41 and 46, was damaged
at the end of each line when the scribe cut it from the block of lapis lazuli/ which
Knrigalzu dedicated to Bel. It reads: 1. A-na""Bel (En[-Ul] ) 2. he-el ma-ti-a-ti
be- \ri--s1i!i\ 3. Ku-lrli-gal-zu ri-ia-um [na-ram''''BeUtfY i. pa-li-ih [she-mu-u
""Belf],^ "To Bel, lord of the lands, his lord, Kurigalzu, the shepherd beloved
by Bel it, he who fears (and) obeys Bel,"
The cuneiform text of the lapis lazuli disc on PI. 23, ^NTo. 61, proves the correct-
ness of my conjecture in Z. A. YII, pp. 305-318. The fourth character of 1. 3 is,
however, not as I supposed, ICa but Kad.^ The disc thus furnishes us the new and
interesting writing Jcaddashman^ instead of the hitherto kadashman.
No. 66 and 67 of PL 25 are the obverse and reverse of the same fragment of an
agate ring. The dedication on it was apparently written by one king only, who, in need
of space, inscribed both the upper and lower side of his gift. As the remnant of the
last character of Xo. 66 is doubtless to be completed to Ka-[diagh'-ra'"'\, the ideo-
gram shai', standing before it, must be the title of a king, whose name ended in LIL
(the last character of '""""'^iV^iZZy or Bel). According to our i^resent knowledge
of the rulers of the Cassite dynasty, the name can be read either Kudur-'""""' EN-
LIL^ (cf. :N'o. 64) or Kadashman-'^''^"BN-LIL (N'o. 65). The obverse of the ring
(N^o, 67) contains part of a name ending in \h'\u-ri-ia\_-asli\ which again can be
completed either to ShagashalU-Buriash, the son of Kudur-''"'^''"^A^-2yZZ/, or "' to
.... huriash (Ko. 68, col. T, 5), the son of Kadashman-""°'''EN-L1L. As no in-
scriptions of the former seem to have been found in Xippur, and the characters of
Kos. 66 and 67 resemble those of JSTo. 68 more than of Xo. 64, I assisrn the ring to
the king mentioned in Xo. 68, ?. e., in all probability Kadashraan-Buriash, who,
according to III R. 4, No. 1, was at war with an Assyrian king.* The following
• Cf. Hilprecht, "Zur Lapislazuli Frage im Babylonischen," Z. A. VIII (in print).
'■' Briinrow, I. c, 5309. Cf. Meissner, Beitriige zum AUbabylonischen Primtreeht, p. 11.5, No. 31, 3.
' Uncertain ; restored according to Brit. Mus., 81, 8-30, 9, 1. 8,9 (cf Jensen, Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 130):
ri-'a(8ie! instead of Jensen's 'u)-u na-ram, UnBelit, pal-liu slie-rmi-u il"S?iamash.
♦ Briinnow, I. c, 3701. See also my "Naolitrag" in Z. A. VII, p. 318.
^ This is not to be used in favor of Pinches' identification of kaddaah witli gaddash and gan(kan)-dash. I adhere
to what I remarlied in Z. A. VII, p. 309, note 4, until Gaddash or Gandash, the founder of the Cassite dynasty, has
actually been found written with the character Ka (or Ka), or the word kad{d)ash in Cassite proper names like Kad-
(d)ashman-Turgu. with the value ga (or ka). Cf. PI. 35, No. 68, col. 1, 14, 15, dumu sag Kad-ash-ma-an-<i«mrEN-LIL,
"(.... riash) the first son of Kadashman-ENLIL." My writing dumu Ka-dd-asA-ma-an-dingir Bel {Z. A. VII, p.
309, note 3) is to be corrected accordingly.
« Generally read Kudur-BH. It would be more appropriate to transliterate him Kudar-Turgu (see below). That
he was king will be shown in my article, " Die Ergiinzung der Naraen zweier Kassitenkonige," Z. A. VIII (in print).
' For various obvious reasons other possibilities have been excluded as improbable.
« The conjecture of Delitzsch (Kossder, pp. 10 seg.; Hommel, Gesch., p. 437 se?.), that the Assyrian king was
Shalmaneser I, is proved by the new chronology which I am able to establish for a number of Cassite kings. Cf.
below p. 37.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 33
is an attempt to restore the legend according to tlie usual phraseology of this class
of inscriptions: Obverse, ["'"''"' Bn-Ul Ugal-a-ni-{ir) Ka-da-as7i-ma-an-B]u-ri-{a-
[asJi], Keverse, [dumu (sag) Ka-da-ash-ma-an-'"'Eii]-lil lugal Ka[-dmg{r-ra^'' a-mu-
na-shuh], " To Bel, his lord, Kadashman-Buriash, (first) son of Kadashman-EN"-
LIL, king of Babylon, presented it."
The question remains to be settled, whether the name of the father of Kadash-
man-Buriash is to be read Kadashman-Bel, as has generally been done,' or Kadash-
man-Enlil- or still in another way. The second reading needs no refutation. It is
in itself impossible. The first seems to me at present improbable. For while there
are Babylonian proper names which are composed of Babylonian words and the name
of a foreign god,^ there is no evidence that there were in use any which contain a
Cassite word and at the same time the name of a Babylonian deity. The example
quoted by Delitzsch* should be read ^I^azi-Shihu.'^ For this ver}^ reason I regard
the correct pronunciation of Kadashraan-''"'^""-2Z^iZL as being either Kadashman-
Kharbe" or Kadashman-Turgu,'' in other words the Cassite king Kadashman-
^"'^"EN-ZiIL may represent either of the two persons. Which of the two
is the more probable? There are two Cassites of the name Kadashman-Kharbe
to be considered. The one was the father of Kurigalzn I.' As, however, there is no
proof that he was a king,* we leave him here out of consideration, the more readily,
as other reasons make his identification with Kadashman-''"'^''^^7yZZy well-nigh
impossible. The other Kadashman-Kharbe is entirely out of the question,*" as none
of the six kings following the latter successively, according to List b, ends in ... .
' «. g., Delitzsch, Koitaer, p. 20 ; Pinches, The, Academy, September 5, 1891, p. 199, 6, and last Hilprecht, Z. A.
VII, p. 316.
- Hommel, 6e>ch., p. 43S : Kara-Inlil.
'e. </., Slmhamuna-ahiddina (Delitzsch, Koasaer, pp. 18, 31, 28), KatTithu-nadin-ahu (ib.)-
* Kosider, p. 18, note 1.
* For Cass. Shihu = Babyl. Marduh of. Delitzsch, Eossaer, pp. 20, 21, 39. From the few published documents
in which Nazi-Shihu or members of his family (cf. the passages on p. 43) are mentioned, it is evident that this Cassite
family lived in Northern Babylonia and was very prominent and influential. Even Nebuchadrezzar I, shalilu Kash.
sh%, treated its chief with distinction {Freibrief, col. II, 12 : Kalu Akkad). In view of the true character (Hil-
precht, Z. A. p. 811, note 3) of the so-called " Cassito-Semitic vocabulary " (Delitzsch, Kosader, p. 34 seg.), and of what
has been said about the formation of proper names above, I believe Nazi-Shihu in V R. 44, 43a, to be the same person as
the high dignitary who appears as the first witness in the "Freibrief " of Nebuchadrezzar I.
« For Kharbe = B81 cf. Delitzsch, Kogsder, p. 23 ; for Turgu — Bgl cf. Hilprecht, Z. A. VII, p. 316. note 3, and
the following lines above.
' Cf. Winckler in Z. A. II, pp. 307-311
' Against Delitzsch, Oesch. (" Ubersicht ")■ who does not hesitate to number him among the Cassite rulers.
* The principle stated by Winckler in Z. A. II, p. 310, 1. 7-10, is correct, but his identification of Kadashman-
B81 with Kadashman-Kharbe is impossible.
34 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
riash, as is required.^ That Turgu is another Cassite equivalent for the Babylonian
Bel (of Nippur), I have endeavored to show in Z. A. VII, p. 316, note 3. Bat there
are other reasons for identifying Kadashman-Tnrgu with Kadashman-*"''"'-E'iV-i/i ••
(1) The cuneiform characters of the inscriptions of Kadashman-Tnrgu on Plates
23, 24, are strikingly similar to those of Kadashman>"^"-&iV'-i^/2^ and especially
his son (PL 25). (2) The son of Kadashman-'*'"^"'-E'iV-iyZL bears precisely the
same title (PI. 25, :N'o. 68, col. I, 6), as Kadashman-Turgu (PI. 24, 1, 8).-
On PI. 28 we meet with the first personal inscription of Bammdn-shum-usur,
contemporary of the Assyrian king, Bel-kndnr-usur. The biick legend is written in
Sumerian and reads : 1. '^"""En-lil 2. lugal hur-kur-ra 3. lugal-a-ni-ir 4. '"'"■''''
Bammdn-sliwn-usur 5. siha she-ga-bi 6. n-a En-lW^'-a 7. sag-ush E-kur-ra 8.
E-hur e M-ag-ga-a-ni 9. *''^^" al-ur-ra-ta 10. mu-un-na-ru, " To Bel, lord of lands,
his lord. Ham man shum-usui-, his favorite shepherd, adorner of Xippur, chief of Ekur,
built Ekur, his beloved house, with bricks."
Winckler, following Sayce, ^ latterly inclines to I'egard the Babylonian king
" Rammfui-shum-nasir," in III R. 4, l^o. 5, as identical with the ruler whose inscrip-
tion has just been translated.^ This, however, is utterly impossible. Sayce and
Winckler misread the name of the king mentioned in III R. According to the law
underlying the formation of Babylono- Assyrian personal proper names, the cuneiform
group Rammdn-MU-8HE8H-IR can only be read Ramman-musheshir, " Ramman is
directing (ruling)." '' This king lived before Burnaburiash and has not even the
name in common with the above-given Ramman-shum-usur.
' For K&daahmnn-dimrEN-LIL, himself king (PI. 35, No. 65), was the father of another Ising (PI. 25, No. 68,
col. I, 16), ending in ... . riash (ibid., 1. 5).
^ Besides the personal votive inscriptions of King Kadashman-Turgu, many tablets dated in his reign were found in
Nippur. It is certain that he was one of the best known princes of the Cassite dynasty and ruled more than fifteen
years. It seems, therefore, strange that his name, being entirely Cassite, should have been omitted by the compiler
of K. 4436 (V R. 44, 21-44, a, J). As soon as we read the name in V R. 44, 39, a, Kadashman-Turgu, as I proposed
above, the difficulty is removed. And, indeed, this reading finds new confirmation. All the names placed together
by the compiler in V R. 44, 33-44, are purely Cassite. Therefore we are obliged to regard the ideogram in the name
of Kadashman-d"wV£'jV-£/i,, which is explained by its Assyrian cqu'walent Tukulti-BHinihe right column, as Cassite
in the left column. That dingivEN-LlL was not pronounced Kharbe seems, apart from the above-given reasons,
to be indicated by the fact that Kharbe in V R. 44, 33 a (i.e., in the left column) is written phonetically Khar-be. From
names like Kharbi-Shi/su (IV R.'^ 34. No. 2, 1. 5, 14), "Bel (= the lord) is Marduk," we may infer that the real mean-
ing of Kharbi was something like "lord." The use of Kharbi for the name of a certain god, resembles, therefore,
closely that of MngirEJV in the later Babylonian time (cf Tiele, Oesch.. p. 538). Turgu on the other hand seems t^
have been t/it Bel of the Cassites, i. e., exactly corresponding in his rank to the dingivBN-LIL or B@l of Nippur, the
highest god of their Pantheon.
' R. P.'. Vol. II, p. 207, note 1 (cf. Vol. I, p. 16).
* Oeaeh., p. 102 (cf., however, pp. 88, note, and 157).
' Cf. u-»hesh-she-ru, Sanh. Kuy. 3, 31.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR; 35
The brick legend on PI. 29 was already published by Pinches in Hebraica, Vol. VI,
pp. 55-58. I need make no apology for republishing it here, as Mr. Pinches' edition,
I am sorry to say, is of little use, the cuneiform text and translation oflfered by
him being unfortunately incorrect in all essential points. The legend was stamped
" by means of a wooden block, on the brick." The stamp, however, having been
carved very shallowly, the inscription, " though impressed evenly," is not very distinct
on any of the many hundreds of bricks which were found.' Besides, the surface is
covered "with a thin deposit, which adds to the difficulty of deciphering the in-
scription." ^Notwithstanding all this, I did not deem it necessary to mark any of
its cuneiform characters as doubtful. My copy was made after a long and careful
study of each character, and especial attention was paid to every detail. Certain
cuneiform characters could not be recognized distinctly on the original except in the
light immediately j^receding sunrise, the best time for copying difficult cuneiform in-
scriptions. On the following points I am obliged to differ from Mr. Pinches :
1. Pinches : " The date of this inscription is uncertain. Judging from the style
of the characters, it should be about 1500 B. C, but it may be as early as 2500 B. C."
In the present writer's opinion the inscription belongs to one of the last rulers of the
Cassite dynasty. For paleographic reasons it cannot be older than 1250 B. C, and
in fact belongs to a king who ruled c. 1165 B. C
2. Pinches transliterates the name of the ruler (1. 4) " N^in-Dubba," regards its
bearer to be a lady, and adds, the inscription " is the only text of a queen of Meso-
potamia known." Mr. Pinches should have been the more careful in introducing this
regent as a female to Assyriologists. I read 1. 4 Mili-Sliikhu (see below) and regard
this person as being the well-known Cassite king who ruled c. 1171-1157 B. C.
3. The first character in 1. 5 is, according to Mr. Pinches, nin, " lady," while in
reality the text gives siha, "shepherd."
4. Mr. Pinches reads (1. G) lugal Ega, " queen of Ega," and adds, " Ega is probably
another name for this city [JS'ippur], or for a part of it." The phrase thus misunder-
stood by Mr. Pinches is the very common title higal lig (?)- -ga, " the powerful king."
The inscription in question reads as follows: 1. ^'""''Mi-Ul-lail) 2. lugal hur-
kur-ra 3. lugal-a-ni-ir 4. ""'""' Mili-'^'""''' 8hihu 5. siha she-ga-bi 6. lugal lig (?)
-ga 7. lugal ub-da tah-tab-ba 8. E-Tcur 9. e-ki-ag-ga-a-ni 10. ''"'"al-ur-ra-ta
11. mu-tm-na-ru, " To Bel, lord of lands, his lord, Mili-Shikhu, his favorite shep-
herd, powerful king, king of the four quarters of the earth, built Ekur, his beloved
house, with bricks."
•Cf. "Table of Contents."
' Jensen in Z. A. 1, p. 396, note 4.
36 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
My reasons for identifying the name in I. 4 with that of Mili-Shikhu are as fol-
lows: (1) The king must have lived after Ramman-shum-usnr, because a few bricks
of the latter' were found in the platform of the temple erected by hira." (2) Paleo-
graphic reasons point to the end of the Cassite dynasty as the date of his inscription.
Apart from a certain difference of appearance between Ramman-shum-usur's legend
and that of the king in question, the one having been inscribed, the other stamped,
there is a decided similarity between the characters of the two inscriptions. (3) One
of the titles (1. 5), the phraseology of the beginning (1. 1-3), and — what is especially
characteristic — that of the end of the two inscriptions (1. 8-11, otherw. 10), in other
words, 8 (otherw. 7) lines are absolutely identical. Hence it follows that the king in
question must have ruled not long after Ramman-shum-usur ; was possibly his suc-
cessor. (4) This result is corroborated by an analysis of the first half of 1. 4. The
determinative dingir is not unfrequently found before the names of Cassite kings.*
The second and third characters are to be read 8HA (Ubbuy + ha. The absence of
the two inner wedges in SUA is due to the shallowness with which the characters of
the stamp were carved. They are found on another (badly preserved) brick, of the
same king, the legend, of which was written with the hand, and differs slightly in
other respects.^ As the inscription is written in Sumerian, the syllable ba indicates
that the Sumerian value of the preceding sign ended in b, in other words, was the
dialectic form of a word ending in g — probably shag. As the personal proper names
occurring in the later Sumerian inscriptions are, as a rule, not to be read Sumerian,
but as they were actually pronounced," we read the ideogram (shaba) with one of its
common Semitic equivalents, Jcirhu, libhu, m'lla, etc'
Only one of the Semitic ideographic values of this character fulfills the require-
ment of forming the beginning of one of the well-known names of the last four Cassite
kings, i. e., milu or mili. As, on the other hand, there is only one Cassite king of
that period who begins with Mili, I confidently believe the last group of cuneiform
characters in 1. 4 to be an ideogram for the god Marduk, or his Cassite equivalent
Shikhu, and read the whole name accordingly Mili-Shikhu.
The following list is an attempt at restoring part of the broken List b, and giv-
ing the chronology and succession of the last twenty-four kings of the Cassite
' Together with a few of Ur-Ninib, Kurigalzu, and one of Bur-Sin I.
'Cf. above, p. 27, and "Table of Contents," PI. 29, No. 82.
' Cf. Hilprecht in Z. A. VII, pp. 308-310.
*Cf. Briinnow, I. e., 7983.
"Cf. Vol. I, Part 2.
"Cf. also Jensen in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 117, notes 6-9.
'Cf. Brunnow, I. c, 7985-7992.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 37
dynasty, which ruled over Babylonia for 576 years.^ My reasons for changing the
generally accepted order of several of these kings will be found in a special article.
If the date which I assigned to the first rulers of the Pashe dynasty be accepted,
my chronology from Kurigalzu II to Bel-shum-iddina II must be regarded as abso-
lutely certain. As the rulers between Barnaburiash and Kurigalzu II are well
known, it is also settled beyond doubt that Shagashalti-Buriash lived before Kuri-
galzu I. ]N^abuna'id's statements concerning the chronology of Sargon I, Hammu-
rabi, Burna-Buriash, and Shagashalti-Buriash must be regarded as only approximate
dates. The events recorded may have occurred at any time in the century before or
after the year given.- Sennacherib's statement concerning Tukulti-IS^inib's cylinder
(600 years) is likewise to be understood in a broad sense.
13. Ramman-musheshir " c.1442-1423 (about twenty years).
14. Kallima(?)-Sin c. 1422-1408 (about fifteen years).
15. Kudur-Turgii^ c. 1407-1393 (about fifteen years?).
16. Shagashalti-Buriash (his son) . e. 1392-1373 (about twenty years).
17. Kurigalzu I (son of Kadash-
man-Kharbe) c. 1372-1348 (about twenty-five years).
18. Kara-indash (his older son?)' . c. 1347-1343 (about five years?).
19. Burna-Buriash (son of 17) . . c. 1342-1318 (about twenty-five years).
20. Kara-Khardash (son of 18) . . c. 1317-1308 (about ten years).
21. JSTazi-bugash (usurper)" c. 1307 (about one year).
22. Kurigalzu II (son of 19) ... . 1306-1284 (nearly twenty-three years).
23. ^azi-Maruttash (his son) . . . 1284-1258 (twenty-six years).
24. Kadashman-Turgu (his son)'. . 1257-1241 (seventeen years).
25. Kadashman-Buriash (his son) . 1240-1239 (two years).
26. Is-am-me . . . . ti 1238-1233 (six years).
27. Shagashalti-Shuriash « 1232-1220 (thirteen years).
' I regard Peiser's doubts as to the correctness of the 576 years (,Z. A. VI, p. 367 seq.) as unnecessary. Through
the excavations at Nippur we are enabled to substantiate part of the statements given as to this dynasty in the list. This
fact teaches us Festina lente!
'And in a sentence like " who built 700 years before Burnaburiash, " we have to make even a greater allowance,
as we do not know which approximate date Nabuna'id had in mind in connection with the reign of Burnaburiash.
' He may have lived at an earlier date.
'Generally read Kudur-Bel. Cf. above, p. 32 seq.
"The same as Kar-indash, son-in-law of Ashur-uballit, king of Assyria. Cf. B. P.^ Vol.V, p. 107, 1. 5, 6, 12.
•Called Su-zigash in R. P.\ Vol. V, p. 107, 1. 10, 13.
'Cf. Hilprecht in Z. A. VII, p. 317 (cf. PI. 33, No. 61). The date there assigned to Kadashman-Turgu (c. 1340
B. C.) is to be corrected according to that given above. For his identification with Kadashman-<''"ff«>.Si\r-Z.Z£ see
above, p. 33 seq.
•Cf. above, p. 11.
38 OLD BABYLONIAK INSCRIPTIONS
28. BibeEiashu] (his son)^ 1219-1211 (nine years).
29. Bel-shum-iddina I 1210-1209 (one year and a half).
30. Kadashman-Kharbe 1209-1208 (one year and a half).
31. Ramman-shum-iddina 1207-1202 (six years).
32. Ramman-shum-usur 1201-1172 (thirty years).
33. Mili-Shikhu (his son)- 1171-1157 (fifteen years).
34. Marduk-abal-iddina (his son) . 1156-1144 (thirteen years).
35. Zamama-shum-iddina 1143 (one year).
36. Bel-shum-iddina II ' 1142-1140 (three years).
The last 24 kings = c. 303 years ; the first 4 kings = 68 years ; the remaining 8
kings = 205 years and 9 months (each 25-26 years in average ''). Total, 36 kings
= 576 years and nine months.
THE DYNASTY OF PASHE.^
The cuneiform tablet published on PI. 30 and 31 forms a part of the collection
J. S., purchased by the Expedition from Joseph Shemtob" for the University of Penn-
sylvania, July 21, 1888. Unfortunately it is impossible to ascertain with certainty
where the stone tablet was found.' In regard to its size and mineralogical character
it closely resembles the " black stone of Za'aleh," to be found in I R. 66, with which
it also has much in common as to its contents. Both belong to the class of the so-
called Tcudurru inscriptions.* A piece of ground situated in the land of Kaldi, in the
province of Bit-Sinraagir (I, 1, 2), which for many years (I, 3-8) had been in pos-
session of the family of a certain I^abu-shum-iddina (I, 15) but had been unlawfully
reduced in size by Ekarra-ikisha, at that time governor of Bit-Sinmagir (I, 9-15),
was upon the complaint of the owner (I, 16-11, 5) restored to its original extent by
' Identical with S. 2106, 1. 9. See above, p. 11.
»Cf. Belser in B. A. II, p. 197, 1. 31.
»Cf. R. P.\ Vol. V, p. Ill, 1. 14 ; p. 112, 1. 16. Cf. also below, p. 41.
* Such long reigns appear in no way improbable when compared with the longer reigns of fifteen rulers of the
first and second dynasties of Babylon.
' Sayce (B. P.', Vol. I, p. 17, note 3) regards this city as identical with Isin and Patesi. Cf. II R. 53, 13a.
' Cf. Harper, Eebraica V, pp. 74-76.
' Cf. "Table of Contents," PI. 30, 31.
' I reckon as such not only "those Babylonian documents which are inscribed on blocks of stone not always quite
regularly hewn" (Belser, B. A. II, p. Ill), but also those which, like ours and the Za'aleh stone, were kept within
doors and possibly as duplicates of the "steles," which were naturally exposed to destructive influences, so that in
disputes concerning boundaries they might furnish the basis for a legal decision.
CHIEPLT TKOM NIPPUB. 39
Bel-nadin-aplu, king of Babylon, in the fourth year of his reign (11, 6-10). The
document closes with a blessing for the oflScial who in time to come shall respect
the decision (II, 11-20), and with a curse against him who shall remove the boundary
again (II, 21-24).
Apart from the fact that the stone furnishes us with the name of one of the early
kings of the " Sea-land," with that of a hitherto unknown province or county of the
land of Kaldi,^ and with other details of interest, it is of the greatest importance for
its chronological bearings. For the following reasons, the stone must be assigned to
the Pashe dynasty : (1) The cuneiform characters are those which are characteris-
tic of the documents of that period, and especially they resemble those of the charter
{Freihrief) of Nebuchadrezzar I. - (2) Ekarra-ikisha, son of Ea-iddina, is mentioned
as an official both on our stone (I, 10, 11 ; II, 6) and on that of Za'aleh (II, 6).
From this it follows that our stone belongs to about the same time as the other
which bears the date of the first year of King Marduknadinahe. (3) But we are
able to fix the date of our stone even more exactly from the statement in col. I, 7-15,
according to which the piece of land in question was in possession of the family of
I^abu-shum-iddina until the time of Nebuchadrezzar I, but in the fourth year of King
Belnadinaplu was unlawfully encroached upon by the governor, Ekarra-ikisha. The
result naturally is that the stone dates from the reign of Belnadinaplu, and that the
latter was the immediate successor of Nebuchadrezzar I. This proves, at the same
time, that the supposition made by AYinckler ' and Delitzsch,'^ that Marduknadinahe
was the immediate successor of Nebuchadrezzar I, is wrong, and that the order is
rather Nebuchadi"ezzar I, Belnadinaplu, Marduknadinahe.
The question arises, What place must be assigned to this group of three kings
in the dynasty of Pashe ? This, in my opinion, can be answered with entire certainty.
For although the Babylonian list" has been broken off at the very place where the
names of the rulers of this dynasty once stood, yet the characters which remain of the
last three kings serve us in solving the question. Of the five known kings of this dy-
nasty, 1. Nebuchadrezzar I, 2. Belnfidinaplu, 3. Marduknadinahe, 4. Mardukshapik-
zirim {sic!) (not Marduktabikzirim)' 5. Eammanapluiddina, none of them fit into the
•Delitzsch, Paradies, p. %02uq.; Winckler, Vniers., p. 51 aeq.
'' Cf. Hilprecht, Freibrief Nebukadnezar' s I, and V R. 55-57.
' On our stone he appears as " governor of Bit-Sinmagir ;" on that of Za'aleh as " governor of the city of Ishin ;"
80 that he probably had been transferred on the accession of Marduk-nadin-ajie, or possibly a little earlier. The pre-
vious "governor of Isliin " was Shamash-nadinshumu, son of Atta-iluma (cf. Freibrief NebukadMzar'i I, col. ii, 17).
* Qesch., p. 96. 5 QeuJi., p. 93.
'Winckler, Untera., p. 146 «eg'.
' A cylinder fragment of this king, in possession of Mr. Talcott Williams, of Philadelphia, was transliterated and
translated in Z. A. IV, 301-323. Paleographic reasons are decisive in fixing the date of this cylinder. Mr. Williams
has given me his kind permission to publish the cuneiform text in the second part of the present volume. Cf. below, p. 44.
40 OLD BABYLOKIAN INSCRIPTIONS
remaining characters of the last three names of the dynasty. It follows, therefore, that
all the five must have reigned before these. As the kings which have been numbered 4
and 5 are known to have been successors of Marduknadinahe, it likewise follows that
Nebuchadrezzar I cannot have stood lower than the fourth place in the list. It may
be safely asserted, however, that he stood in the first place, and was, therefore, the
founder of the Pashe dynasty. To this two objections may be offered: (1) That the
traces of the cuneiform characters which follow the number of the years in the List b
do not favor the reading of Ndbn ; (2) that Sayce,^ on the evidence furnished
by the " Early Tablet of the Babylonian Chronicle," - col. IV, 17, claims that place
in the list for a king Rammdnu-sharra [or shum] ^ -iddina. In reply to this the fol-
lowing is to be said :
1. Scholars have adhered too closely to the view that the mutilated begin-
ning of the first line of the List b contains after ilu traces of the sign SHU,* the
ideogram for the god Marduk. Winckler, in his edition of the list, cuts loose from
this assumption, and gives as certain only ilu. This variation from the carefully
guarded tradition is supported by Bezold's remark '" that " at this point the tablet
is in a most lamentable condition." The latter, however, seems to recognize traces
of two other wedges immediately following. But the chief problem is whether
beneath the two horizontal wedges of ilu, there can be seen a small horizontal wedge
so that the sign can be completed to the combination of ilu and AG,® the ideogram
for NaM. From the fact that all those who have examined the list personally are
silent on this point I infer that the tablet at this place is too indistinct to permit any
definite conclusion. Then, however, there is nothing in the remaining traces that
forbids the reading of JSTaiti instead of Marduk.
2. From what we know from the scanty cuneiform accounts,' it is clear that
the last years of the Cassite dynasty were a time of war and political disturbance,
and that it was the weakness of its last representative which furnished the opportunity
for its own overthrow and for the rise of the house of Pashe. No matter what verb
may have stood in the effaced passage R. Pr, Vol. V, p. 112, 1. 16,* the supposition
1 B. P.\ Vol. V, p. 112, note 1.
» R. F.\ Vol. V, pp. 106-114.
' The reading of the middle character seems to be doubtful. Mr. Pinches would render a great service to Assyriol-
ogists by publishing the exact cuneiform text at an early date.
* Briinnow, I. c, 10834.
» Z. A. IV, p. 317, note 1.
«Brunnow, i. c, 2786. Cf. Homrael, GescA., p. 448.
' Cf. especially B. P.\ Vol. V, pp. Ill, 112, 1. 14-22.
' I favor umashiUr, "he left," instead of "he renounced " or "abdicated " (Pinches). Cf. however, Tiele, I. c,
p. 165.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 41
of Sayce, that line 17 contains the name of the second king of the Pashe dynasty, seems
to me improbable, since the same Elamite king, Kidm-Khutrutash,^ who already had
attacked Akkad in the time of Belshumiddina, is again the assailant in this passage.
If Sayce were right, this Elamite would have made his second incursion into Akkad
about twenty years after the first. This in itself is possible, but it is made less proba-
ble by the expression " Rammanu-shum-iddina returned," which apparently connects
this section closely to that which precedes. Besides it will be noticed that Rammfi-
nu-shum-iddina does not bear the title of king, as Belshumiddina. It seems more
probable, therefore, to see in Eammanu-shum-iddina, the unfortunate son (or possi-
bly another relative) of Belshumiddina, who " returned " from the place to which
Belshumiddina or his family had fled, in order to take possession of the throne as
his lawful inheritance.
This leads me to the discussion of the reasons for regarding Nebuchadrezzar I
as the founder of the Pashe dynasty.
1. It needs no proof that at a time when a countiy is harried by a powerful
enemy ,^ and a descendant of illustrious ancestors puts forward claims to the crown,
which are based on historic rights, a usurper who is to found a new dynasty must
distinguish himself by eminent courage and ability. Such an able ruler, who,
according to our present knowledge, surpassed in preeminence all the other kings of
his dynasty, Nebuchadrezzar I is certified to have been. He conducted successfully
the wars against Elam, the hereditary enemy of Babylon in the East, turned his arms
victoriously against the North by "casting down the mighty Lulubaean," and
marched, as no other Babylonian king for centuries had ventured, conquering into Syria.
2. It is worthy of notice that both the documents bearing his name are written in
connection with his successful conflict with Elam. His wars with this country,
therefore, must have been especially important, perilous and of long duration.'^ Since
we have learned from Pinches' recent publication of the Babylonian Chronicle (col.
IV, 1. 14-22) that the Elamites took advantage of the weakness of the last Cassite
king to devastate Northern and Southern Babylonia, the campaigns of Nebuchadrez-
zar I against Elam become of especial significance. As a usurper he manifestly
was able to hold his position only by rendering the Elamites harmless and by
defeating them on their own soil, thus " avenging Akkad," ^ and restoring quiet and
peace to his own country.
' This and not Shutru ana or Ekutrudish (Pinches, I. c, pp. 111-113) is the probable reading. For the value task
of the character in question see Hilprecht in Z. A. VII, pp. 309, 310, 314. The name means "subject (servant) of the
god Khutrutash" (cf. god Marfitash).
= R. P.', Vol. V, pp. Ill aeq.
' Wlnckler, Qesch., p. 96.
* Hilprecht, Freibrief, col. I, 13.
42 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCEIPTION8
3. Nebuchadrezzar I bears titles which differ entirely from those at that time
characteristic of the rulers of Babylonia. He calls himself, in the manner of the
Egyptians, Shamash mdtishu, "the Sun of his land;" or musliammihu ntshishu, "he
who makes prosjierous his people ;" nasir Tcudureti, muk'inu able,^ " he who protects
the boundaries, establishes (measured) tracts of land ; " shai' Jcindti sJia dm mishari
idinu, "the king of the right, he who judges a righteous judgment;" all are titles
which probably refer to the fact that just before the reign of Nebuchadrezzar I there
was in Babylonia a time of profound misery, when the land did not enjoy sunshine,
and when the peaceful possession of well-defined property was impossible, as the
violence of the stronger superseded law and order, while, at the same time, the boun-
daries of the empire were constantly invaded by powerful enemies ; in other words,
anarchy as we know it existed in Babylonia at the close of the reign of Belshum-
iddina. The significant title, slidlilu Kashshi, "the conqueror of the Cassites,"
acquires doubtless, in this connection, the significance of an allusion to the circum-
stance that it was he who had achieved the restoration of the Semitic element through
the overthrow of the Cassite dynasty .-
4. The boundary stone IV K.^, 38, which is dated in the time of Merodachbala-
dan I, mentions the house (I, 10) and the son (II, 34, 35) of a certain Nazi-Shikhu,
while in the "Preibrief " of Nebuchadrezzar I, a certain Nazi-Shikhu is named as a
high dignitary, A-alu AkTcad. In view of the rare occurrence of this name in Baby-
lonian literature ^ it is natural to regard the two bearers of the same name as identi-
cal. This identification, however, is possible only if Nebuchadrezzar I reigned not
long after Merodachbaladan I,^ i. e., if he, as founder of the Pashe dynasty, came
into power some four years after the latter's death.
' I formerly transliterated this word apU (as Peiser still does in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 164). But since
1886 I have changed my view and substituted the above. As the word stands parallel to kudureti, it must have a
similar meaning. In spite ofnal^balu, II R. 23, 39, b. c, able is to be compared with the Hebrew, "San which, in view
of the Ethiopic and Arabic haU has h. Cf. also Delitzsch, Worterbueh, p. 37, no. 30. In view of the title above
quoted it does not seem improbable that Nebuchadrezzar I assumed his highly significant name, " Nebo, protect the
boundary," only after his usurpation. Another interpretation of the name, "Nebo, protect (thy) servant," has
recently been offered by Jager (7?. A. I, 471, note*). But where is the "thy"? The proper names kudurru and
kidinnu, quoted by Jager, (_l.c.), are not to be regarded as exclamations but as abbreviations of originally longer names.
As the middle part of the name of Nebuchadrezzar is written either kudurru or kudurri (Bezold, Babyloimeh-Aasyritche
lAteratur, p. 136), or kudurra (PI. 82, col. II, 7, of the present volume), it cannot mean "my boundary," as I
formerly interpreted {Freibrief, p. viii, note 1), but "the boundary." Cf my remarks in The Sunday School Times,
February 20, 1893, p. 115, note 3.
' Cf. Hommel, OescJi., p. 451.
' Cf. col. VI, 18 of the boundary stone (published by Belser in B. A. II, pp. 171-185), which furnishes us data
from the time of the kings Ninib-huduri-umr and Nabu-mulAn-aplu. For my transliteration and the formation of the
name, cf. above, p. 33 and note 5.
* For as the son of Nazi-Shikhu who appears as a witness under Merodachbaladan I, was already in possession of
the important oflSce of a sukallu, his father must have been advanced in years.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 43
5. The second king of the Pashe dynasty, according to List b, reigned only six
years. And indeed, while the titles and conquests of Nebuchadrezzar I in his "Frei-
brief " imply a comparatively long reign, there are indications that his immediate
successor, Belnadinaplti, ruled but a short time. This does not necessarily follow
from the circumstance that the document on Plates 30 and 31 is dated in the fourth
year of his reign; but from the fact that Tab-ashap-Marduk,^ son of Esagil-
z^r,^ already mentioned under l!^ebuchadrezzar I as governor of Halwan, appears
again as sukallu in the first year of Marduk-nadin-ahe, i. e., about twenty years later ;
for it is very unlikely that the same person occupied a high and responsible position
under three successive kings, if both of the former two had reigned a long period.
6. Finally this assumption enables us in the simplest way to dispose of certain
chronological difficulties, upon which 1 cannot enter into details here (cf e. g. Z. A.
Ill, p. 269).
The statement of Sennacherib^ furnishes us with a definite datum for the chronol-
ogy of the Pashe dynasty. As it seems most natural to connect the carrying ofi" of the
images of the gods of Ekallati, with Marduknadinahe's victory over Assyria, in the
tenth year of his reign,* we obtain 1107 B. C. as the tenth year of that king's rule,
and 1116 B. C. as the year of his accession to the throne. In accordance with what
has been said above, Nebuchadrezzar I reigned 1139-1123 B. C.,'^ and Bel-nadin-
aplu in 1122-1117 B. C.
A word remains to be said as to the length of the period covered by the Pashe
dynasty. That the reading of seventy -two years which have been generally assigned to
it is impossible, Peiser has shown beyond question by a very simple calculation.''
The number of twelve years for the seventh king of this dynasty, assumed by Tiele
' The reading Tabni-rVeu-Mamduk, "A beneficent king is Marduk," preferred by Tiele (Oesch., p. 161, note 1),
instead of that given above (and first proposed by Oppert and M^naut in Documents Juridiques), needs no refutation.
Tab-aahap- Marduk is the only possible one and means "Good is the exorcism of Marduk." The Caillou de Miehaux
upon which Tab-ashap-Marduk, apparently not so far advanced in years, likevpise appears, belongs to the reign of
Nebuchadrezzar I or of Belnadinaplu (cf. Tiele, I. c, p. 161, and Hommel, Gesch., pp. 454, 459).
^ That Esagilzer is identical with the Ina-Esagilzer of the Za'aleh stone (col. II, 13), was shown in my commen-
tary on the " Freibrief Nebukadnezar's I," in 1883, which at the time was not printed because of a two years' illness.
At present the proof of their identity is unnecessary. Cf. Eulbar-sJmrM-iddina, III R. 43, col. I, 39, and Ina-Euliar-
shurkiiddina, V R. 60, col. I, 39. Cf. also Delitzsch, Eoss'der, p. 15 (cf. however Oeich., "tJbersicht "). To a dif-
ferent efi'ect Jeremias in B. A. I, pp. 370, 280 ; and Peiser in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 117.
' Bcman, 48-50. "Ramman and Sala, the gods of the city of Ekallati, which Marduknadinahg, king of Akkad,
at the time of Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, carried oflf and brought to Babylon, I carried out of Babylon 418 years
later, and brought them back to Ekallati, to their place," i. e., in the year B. C. 689, when Sanherib conquered Babylon.
* Cf. Ill, R. 43, col. I, 5, 37, 28.
' This calculation confirms strikingly the year 1130 B. C, which I gave as the approximate date of his "Frei-
brief " in 1883.
« Z. A. VI, p. 268 seg.
44 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIEFLY PROM NIPPUR.
(I. c, p. Ill) and favored by Delitzsch/ finds no support in Winckler's edition and
besides does not.suflice to solve the chronological difficulty. As according to Peiser
(I. c.) the passage is much effaced, ^ and as his proposed reading, 60 + 60 + 12 = 132
years, is the most simple and probable^ solution of the existing difficulty, I accept it
and accordingly construct the following table :
1. Nebuchadrezzar I, , . 1139-1123 (seventeen years).
2. Bel-nadin-aplu, .... 1122-1117) (six years).
3. Marduk-nadin-ahe, . . 1116-c. 1102 (c. fifteen, at least ten, years).
4. Marduk-shapik-zirim,^
5. Ramman-aplu-iddina
6-7. Two missing kings
8
9. Marduk-bel ....
10. Marduk-zer ....
11. Nabu-shum ....
J
c. 1101-1053 (forty-nine years).
. 1052-1031 (twenty-two years).
. 1030-1029 (one year and six months).
. 1029-1016 (thirteen years).
. 1016-1007 (nine years).
Total one hundred and thirty-two years and six months.
"Anhang" to his Geschichte.
' It is to be regretted that Winckler has not indicated the actual condition of the passage by shading the eflaced
portions of the characters.
'Cf. also Winckler, Gesch., p. 329, note 17. Another possibility (that 60+10+10 + 2=83 stood originally
there) is less probable for various reasons.
* This name has been transliterated JUarduk-sTiapik-zer-mati (Tiele, Qesch., p. 155 ; Delitzsch, Gesch., " Ubersicht ")
or Marduk-ahapik-kul-lat (Winckler, Gesch., p. 98). I regard both transliterations as incorrect, and would substitute
that given above for the following reasons : (1) The cylinder fragment published by Dr. Jastrow (cf. above, p. 31,
note 7) was unfortunately misunderstood by the latter and misread in various passages. Having examined the frag-
ment carefully, I find that the old Babylonian character transliterated ta by Jastrow is distinctly the sign sha in the
form so characteristic for the documents of the Pashe dynasty. The name can only be read Marduh-sliapik-ei-ri-im.
(2) This correct reading is important in connection with the transliteration of the name of Ramman-aplu-iddina's pre-
decessor. It is in itself improbable that two rulers of a Babylonian dynasty of eleven kings bore names almost (if not
wholly) identical. The thought forces itself upon our mind that Marduk-shapik-zlrim is the same person as the king
whose name was heretofore generally read Marduk-shapikzer-mati. That at least these two names are identical is
certain. The last character of the latter name {MAT, Briinnow, I. c, 7386) was eitlier erroneously read by the Assyri-
ologists who copied the so-called "synchronistic history," or by the Assyrian compiler who used a Babylonian original,
instead of the character BIM (Briinnow, I. c, 8867). For it is well known among Assyriologists that the two charac-
ters are nearly identical in the later-middle and the latest periods of Babylonian cuneiform writing. In consideration
of this fact, and in view of the phonetic writing zi-ri-im on the cylinder fragment, I unhesitatingly read the name in
question either phonetically Marduk-shapik-zir-rim, or ideographically (plus phonetic complement) Marduk-shapik-
zlrim{-rim). The king, Marduk-tabik-zirim, introduced by Dr. Jastrow and accepted by Peiser (Schrader's K. B. Ill,
Part 1, p. 162 seq.) as an hitherto unknown ruler of the Pashe dynasty thus disappears. As to my other corrections
of certain readings offered by Dr. Jastrow in connection with the cylinder in question Cf "Sprechsaal" in one of
the next numbers of Z. A.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE EXPEDITION.
I. John P. Peters.
1. Letter on the Babylonian Expedition : The American Journal of Archmology VII, pp. 472-475.
2. A Brief Statement concerning the Babylonian Expedition sent out under the auspices of the University
of Pennsylvania : Proceedings of the American Oriental Society, April 31-33, 1893, pp. CXLVI-CLIII.
3. Notes on Miirdter-Delitzsch's Geschichte : Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie VI, pp. 333-339.
4. A Few Ancient Sites, I and II : The Nation 1889, May 33, p. 433, and May 30, pp. 442, 443.
5. From Niffer to Tello, I and II : ibidem 1889, July 35, pp. 69, 70, and August 1, pp. 90-93.
6. Zenobia, Palmyra, and the Arabs : ibidem 1890, April 3, pp. 276, 377.
7. A Misrepresented Ruin : ibidem 1891, May 7, pp. 375-377.
II. H. V. HiLPRECHT.
1. Keilinschriftliche Funde in Kiffer : Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie TV, pp. 164-168.
2. Aus einem Briefe desselben an C. Bezold : ibidem IV, pp. 382-384.
3. Die jungsten Ausgrabungen in Babylonian : Kolnische Zeitung 1889, June 30, No. 179.
4. Neue Forschungen in Babylonian : Luthardt's Evangelisch Lutherische Kirchemeitung 1889, June 14, pp.
568, 569.
5. The Mouth of the Nahr-el-Kelb : The Sunday School Times 1889, Vol. XXXI, No. 11, p. 163.
6. Die Inschriften Nabukadnezar's im Wadi Brissa : Luthardt's Zeitschrift fur kirchliche Wissenschaft und
kircMiches Leben 1889 IX, pp. 491-498. Compare also The Sunday School Times 1889, Vol. XXXI,
No. 35, pp. 547, 548 : The Inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar in the "Wady Brissa.
7. The Shaykh of Zeta : The Sunday School Times 1890, Vol. XXXII, No. 10, pp. 147, 148.
8. Babylon : ibidem 1893, Vol. XXXIV, No. 20, pp. 306-308.
9. Die Votivinschrift eines nicht erkannten Kassitankonigs : Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie VII, pp. 305-318.
10. Konig Ini-Sin von Ur : ibidem VIL pp. 343-346.
11. Die Erganzung der Namen zweier Kassitankonige : ibidem, in print.
13. Zur Lapislazuli Frage im Babylonischen : ibidem, in print.
III. Robert Francis Harper.
1. Babylonian Letter. — The Joseph Shemtob Collection of Babylonian Antiquities, recently purchased for
the University of Pennsylvania : Hebraica V, pp. 74-76.
2. The Kh. Collection of Babylonian Antiquities belonging to the University of Pennsylvania : ibidem VI,
pp. 59, 60.
3. The Destruction of Antiquities in the East : ibidem VI, pp. 225, 226.
4. Three Contract Tablets of Ashuritililani : ibidem VII, p. 79.
5. A Visit to Zinjirli : The Old and New Testament Student VIII, pp. 183, 184.
6. A Visit to Carchemish : ibidem IX, pp. 308, 309.
7. Down the Euphrates Valley I-III : ibidem X, pp. 55-57 ; 118, 119 ; 367, 368.
8. The Expedition of the Babylonian Exploration Fund, A. B. C. : ibidem XIV, pp. 160-165 ; 213-217 ;
XV, pp. 12-16 ; D. : The Biblical World I, pp. 57-62.
9. Aus einem Briefe desselben an C. Bezold : Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie IV, pp. 163, 164. Compare also
Hebraica VIII, pp. 103, 104 : A-bi-eshu-' = Ebishum.
10. The Site of Old Baghdad : The Academy 1889, February 23, p. 139.
11. A New Babylonian Contract : ibidem 1889, April 20, p. 274.
IV. Theophilus G. Pinches (based upon communications from Dr. Peters and Dr. Harper).
1. An Early Babylonian Inscription from Niffer : Hebraica VI, pp. 55-58.
2. The Discoveries of the American Expedition to Babylonia : The Academy 1891 September 5, p. 199.
Compare also his note "Kadashman :" ibidem 1891, September 12, p. 221.
Xablb ok Contents.
Part L Plates 1-35 and I-XV.
Abbreviations.
c, circa; C. B. M., Catalogue of the Babylonian Museum, University of Pennsylvania; col., column(8) ;
d., diameter ; Dyii., Dynasty ; E., East ; fragrm., fragment(ary) ; h., height ; Inscr., Inscription ; 1., length ;
li., line(8) ; m., meter ; 'S., North ; Nippur I, II, III, etc., refers to the corresponding numbers on Plate XV ;
No., number; Nos., numbers; N. P., Notebook of Dr. Peters made on the ruins of Nippur during the second
year's excavations; Obv., Obverse; orig., original(ly) ; p., page; Pho., Photograph; PL, Plate; Rev.,
Reverse ; S., South ; Sq., Squeeze ; T., Temple of Bel ; til., thick(ness) ; W., West ; w., -width ; Z., Ziqqurratu ;
Z. A., Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie.
Measurements are given in centimetres. Whenever the object varies in size, the largest measurement is given
I. Autograph Reproductions.
Plate. Text. Date.
1 1 Sargon I.
Sargon I,
3 Sargon I.
4 Naram-Sin.
4 5 Al-usharsbid.
Descbiption.
Door socket in diorite, somewhat smaller than the following. Nippur
III, beneath the rooms of T. on the S.E. side of Z. Inscr. 18.5 x
10.12, 2 col., 24 li. Sq. On the rough edge, scratched in the rudest
way, is the same inscr. as PL 14, Nos. 23-25 (cf. also PL 12, No. 20).
Door socket in diorite, 75 x 41.5 X 17.5. Nippur III, same place as
No. 1. Inscr. 17.8X10.35, 2 col., 23 li. C.B- M. 8751. Cf.Pl.1, 1.
The variants li. 17 and 21 have been taken from a thii-d door socket
in diorite, bearing the same inscr. as No. 2, and found in another
trench a short distance from it.
Brick stamp of baked clay, brown, with handle, 9.45x13.56x2.
Nippur III, close to the S. E. wall of Z. Inscr. 2 col., 6 li.
C. B. M. 875L Cf. PLII, 2.
Brick stamp of baked clay, cream colored, handle wanting, 11.75 X
12.08 X 2. Nippur V, in the N.W. extremity. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. M.
8755. Cf. PL II, 3.
Three fragments of a dolomite vase. Orig. d. of the vase c. 40. Fragm.
8891 : 11.10 X 7.7 X 3.8. Fragm. 8892 a and b (glued together):
20.5 X 9.8 X 3.8. Nippur III, approximately same place as PL 1,
No. 1. Inscr. orig. 25.57 X 7.2, 13 li. C. B. M. 8891, 8892 a and b.
The text has been restored by the aid of fragm. 8866, 8865, 8843,
8860, 8859, 8858, 8853, 8854 on the scale of fragm. 8892. Cf. PL
III, 4^12.
♦>
48
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
Plate. Tbxt. Datb.
6 6 Al-usharshid.
6 7 Al-usharshid.
6 8 Al-usharshid.
S 9 Al-usharshid.
5 10 Al-usharshid.
6 11 Same Period.
7 12 Same Period.
7 13 c. 3000 B.C.
8 14 Ur-Gur.
8 15 Dungi.
» 16 Dungi.
9 17 Ishme-Dagan
10 18 Ur-Ninib.
J I 19 Bur-Sin I.
12 20 Bur-Sin II.
Description.
Pragm. of a vase in reddish numulite limestone, h. 16.5, d. 18 (of hole
4.4). Nippur III, same place as PL 4, No. 5. Inscr. orig. 11.75 X
7.05, 6 li. C. B. M. 8888. The text has been restored after No. 5.
Cf. PI. IV, 13.
Pragm. of a white marble vase, h. 21, d. 16.4 at the base, 11.2 at the
centre. Nippur III, same place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. 4.8 x 5.4,
3 li. C. B. M. 8870. Cf. PI. V, 14.
Pragm. of a white marble vase, orig. h. 6, d. 14.5. Nippur III, same
place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. (same as PI. 5, No. 7) 3.2 x 3.8, 3 li.
C. B. M. 8839.
Fragm. of a white marble vase, orig. h. 13.5, d. 15 (of hole 6.3). Nip-
pur III, same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Mark on the bottom, 2.4 x 2.6.
Same inscr. as PI. 5, No. 7. N. P.
Fragm. of a diorite vase, 7.35 X 2.9 X 0.8, orig. d. 22.2. Nippur III,
same place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. 3, orig. 11 li. C. B. M. 8842.
Wliite marble tablet, Obv. flat, Kev. rounded, 11.3 X 7.2 X 2.65. Nippur,
apparently from the N. W. extremity of V in the neighborhood of
PI. 3, No. 4 (cf. Hilprecht in Z. A. IV, pp. 282-284). Inscr.
8 (Obv.) -1- 7 (Rev.) = 15 li. C. B. M. 8757. Copied by myself on
the ruins of Nippur, April 8, 1889.
Fragm. of a large vase in white marble, 10 x 12.5 x 6.2. Presumably
neighborhood of Babylon. Inscr. 2 col., 8 li. C. B. M. 1128.
Fragm. of a slab in compact limestone, 12.8 X 7.35 X 5.55. Nippur
III, inside of the great S.E. temple wall. Inscr. 3 col., 15 li.
C. B. M. 8841.
Basalt tablet, Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, lower left corner wanting,
12.25 X 5.58 X 2.2. Northern Babylonia, probably Ursag-Kesh.
Inscr. 8 (Obv.) + 1 (Rev.) = 9 li. C. B. M. 841.
Agate tablet, bored lengthwise, both sides convex, lower part wanting,
4.4 X 4.3 X 0.8. Nippur III, in a chamber on the edge of the canal
outside of the great S.E. wall of T. Obv. Inscr. 8 li. C. B. M.
8598. For Rev. see PI. 21, No. 43.
Soapstone tablet, Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, 8.6 x 5 x 1.88. Babylonia,
probably Muqayyar. Inscr. 6 (Obv.) + 2 (Rev.) = 8 li. C. B. M.
842.
Fragm. of a slab in diorite, 8.1 x 10.5 x 5.6. Nippur III, S. of Z.
Inscr. 3 col., 3 + 2 + 2 = 7 li. C. B. M. 3243.
Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, brown, 32 (orig.) x 23 (fragm.) x
8.4 (orig.). Nippur III, found out of place in a later structure
OB the S.E. side of Z. (cf. PI. 29, No. 82; PI. 13, No. 22; PI. 20,
No. 38). Inscr. (written) 23.3 x 10.65, 13 li. C. B. M. 9021. Cf.
IV, R. 35^ No. 5.
Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, brown, 30.5 (fragm.) x 20 (fragm.) x
6.5 (fragm.). Nippur III, found out of place, same place as PI.
10, No. 18. Inscr. (stamped) 22.5 x 10.5, 10 li. C. B. M. 8642.
Door socket in diorite, an irregular cube, c. 19 each side. Nippur III,
in a small shrine outside of the great S.E. wall of T. Inscr. 15.4 x
13.4, 2 col., m- 6=17 li. C. B. M. 8838.
CHIEFLT FEOM NIPPtJE.
49
Plate. Text. Date.
13 21 Bur-Sin 11.
13
15
22 Bur-Sin II.
14 23-25 Gande.
15 26 c. 2250 B.C.
15 27 Hammurabi.
28 Cassite Dyn.
15
29
Cassite Dyn.
15
30
Cassite Dyn.
15
31
Cassite Dyn.
15
32
Cassite Dyn.
16
33
Burna-Buriash,
17 33 Burna-Buriash.
18 34 Burna-Buriash.
18 35 Kurigalzu.
18 36 Kurigalzu.
19 37 Kurigalzu.
Description.
Door socket in diorite, 33 X 28 X 23. Nippur III, same place as PL 11,
No. 19. Inscr. around the hole, 23.5 X 5.35, 17 li. Sq. On the
bottom at the edge is the same inscr. as PI. 14, Nos. 23-25 (cf. also
PI. 1, No. 1).
Brick of baked clay, light brown, very soft, covered with bitumen, 30
X 30 X 6.5. Nippur III, same place as PI. 11, No. 19. Inscr.
(written) 5.97 x 5.3, 2 li. Sq. The inscription is generally re-
peated tliree or four times on the same brick (edges and sides). ,
Large unhewn blocks of white marble and reddish granite, varying in
d. from 25-60. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1,
No. 1. Inscr. 6 X 5.3 ; 7 x 6.2; 6.5 x 7.7 ; each 3 li. Sq.
Cream-colored soapstone tablet. Rev. broken off, 4.85 x 4 X 0.8. Pre-
sumably neighborhood of Babylon. Inscr. 8 li. C. B. M. 103.
Fragm. of an ornamented soapstone stamp in the shape of a vase,
h. 13.3, d. 12.2 at the bottom, 8.7 at the centre. Presumably
neighborhood of Babylon. Inscr. (on the bottom) 8 li. C. B. M.
1126. Cf. PI. IX, 20.
Lapis lazuli disc, d. 1.7. The thickness of this class of inscribed
objects found at the same place, if not expressly stated in the
following lines, varies from 0.2 to 0.8 cm. Nippur III, same place
as PL 8, No. 15. C. B. M. 8685.
Agate cameo, d. 1.55. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15.
C. B. M. 8687.
Lapis lazuli disc, d. 1.6. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15.
C. B. M. 8721.
Agate cameo, bored lengthwise, 1.7 x 1.9. Nippur III, same place as
PL 8, No. 15. C. B. M. 8723.
Lapis lazuli tablet, bored lengthwise, 1.65 x 1.8. Nippur I, apparently
out of place, in a gully on the surface. C. B. M. 8720.
White marble mortar ; an uninscribed portion is broken from its side,
h. 14.4, d. 12.8. Presumably neighborhood of Babylon. Inscr.
31.0 X 11.25, 27 li. C. B. M. 12. Cf. PL IX, 21.
The same, continued.
Ivory knob of a sceptre (or conventionalized form of a phallus), top
rounded, base flat, round hole in the centre, h. 3.5, d. 5.9 at the topt
6.2 at the bottom. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15.
Inscr. 5.8 X 2.42, 5 li. C. B. M. 8730. Cf. PL X, 23.
Tablet in feldspar (mottled dark brown and gray), upper (inscribed)
surface convex, lower flat, 3 X 12.2 X 0.9. Nippur III, same place
as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. M. 8600.
Irregular block of lapis lazuli, upper part inscribed, 5.1 X 9.25 X 5.
Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3.38 X 4.48, 6 li.
C. B. M. 8599. Cf. PL XI, 25.
Door socket in white marble with red veins here and there, 46.5 x 43.8
X22. Nippur III, on the N.E. side of T. near the outer wall. In-
scr. on both sides of the hole, 11 li. intended, but only 7 li. inscribed,
14.3 X 14.3. Copied by myself on the ruins of Nippur, April 6, 1889.
50
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
Plate. Text. Date.
20 38 Eurigalzu.
20
Kurigalzu.
21 40 Kurigalzu.
21 41 Kurigalzu.
21
42
Kurigalzu,
21
43
Kurigalzu.
21
44
Kurigalzu,
21 45 Kurigalzu.
21 46 Kurigalzu.
22 47 Kurigalzu.
22 48 Kurigalzu.
22 49 Kurigalzu.
22 50 Kurigalzu.
22 51 Kurigalzu.
22 52 Kurigalzu.
22 53 Nazi-Maruttash.
Description.
Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, brown, 32 (orig.) X 17 (fragm.)X 7
(orig.). Nippur III, found out of place in a later structure of
the inner wall of Z. (cf. PI. 29, No. 82 ; PI. 10, No. 18). Inscr.
13.5 X 6, 9 li, stamped on the edge ; the space being too small,
a portion of the last character of each line is wanting. C. B. M.
8636.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 9 x 6.3 x 2.7. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 7 li. C. B. M. 9462. Cf.
PI. XI, 26.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 5 x 6.35 x 1.5. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 )i. C. B. M. 8661.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli tablet, 1.7 x 1.7. Nippiur III, same place as
PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. M. 8662. Originally it formed
part of No. 46.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli tablet, 1.8 X 1.2. Nippur III, same place as
PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. M. 8663.
Agate tablet. Eev. of PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 9 li.
Fragm. of a turquoise tablet. Obv. flat, Kev. rounded ; hole bored
nearly perpendicular to the lines of the Obv. ; 3.4 X 3.4 X 0.8.
Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M.
8664.
Lapis lazuli tablet, with two holes, 2 x 2.6. Nippur III, same place
as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. M. 8665.
Two fragm. of a lapis lazuli tablet, 3.65 x 7.25. Nippur III, same
place as Pi. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. In cutting the tablet from the
original block of lapis lazuli the last characters of each line were
lost. C. B. M. 8666. The copy has been made from an electro-
type, on which the space between the two fragments was given too
small (cf. No. 41).
Nine fragm. of a lapis lazuli tablet, 5.1 x 6 x 0.7. Nippur III, same
place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 6 li. C. B. M. 8667.
Lapis lazuli tablet, hole bored near the top parallel with the lines.
2.8 X 3.45. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 5 11.
C. B. M. 8668.
Lapis lazuli disc, hole bored near the centre parallel with the lines
d. 2.5. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. N. P.
Fragm. of an agate ring, d. 1, w. 0.9. Nippur III, same place as PI.
8, No. 15. Inscr. 5 li. C. B. M. 8669. The ring originally formed
the beginning of a votive cylinder (c. 2.6 cm. long), which was
afterwards cut in 3 pieces, each thus forming a ring. For the
centre part see PI. 26, No. 74. The last part has not been found.
Agate cameo, 3.2 X 2.4. Nipjiur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15.
Inscr. 411. N. P.
Fragm. of an agate cameo, 1.7 x 1.2. Nippur III, same place as PI.
8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. M. 8670.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.97. Nippur III, same place as PI.
8, No. 15. Inscr. 6 li. N. P.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.
51
Plate.
Text.
Date.
22
54
Nazi-Maruttash,
22
55
Nazi-Maruttash
23
56
Nazi-Maruttash,
23
25
26
57
69
Nazi-Maruttash.
23
58
Nazi-Maruttash.
23
59
Kadash man-T u rgu .
23
60
Kadashman-Turgu.
23
61
Kadashman-Turgu.
Description.
Lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.05. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15.
Inscr. 5 li. N.P.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 4.7 x 4.6 x 1.7. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 8671.
Magnesite knob of a sceptre (or conventionalized form of a pliallus),
top rounded, base flat, round hole in the centre, h. 5.2, d. 6.9.
Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. around the top,
badly effaced. C. B. M. 8728. Cf. PI. X, 24.
Magnesite knob of a sceptre (or conventionalized form of a phallus),
top slightly rounded, base flat, liole in the centre (round above,
square below), h. 5.2, d. 6.1. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No.
15. Inscr. around the top, badly effaced. C. B. M. 8727. Cf. PI.
X, 22.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, d. 4.4. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8,
No. 15. Inscr. 5 li. (orig. 8). N. P.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, d. 3.7. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8,
No. 15. Inscr. 6 li. (orig. 7). N. P.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.55. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8,
No. 15. Inscr. 4 11. (orig. 5). C. B. M. 8722.
Lapis lazuli disc, d. 3.55, th. 0.35. Place unknown, probably Nippur.
Inscr. 8 li. Original in the Museum of Harvard University,
Cambridge, Mass. Cf. Lyon in Proceedings of the American
Oriental Society, May, 1889, pp. cxxxiv-cxxxvii, and Hilprecht in
Z. A. VII, pp. 305-318.
Lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.7. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15.
Inscr. 5 li. C. B. M. 8673.
Irregular block of lapis lazuli, 17.5 x 11 X 9. Nippur III in a room in
the mounds S. of T. Inscr. 16.4 X 9.5, 20 li. Sq.
Lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.5. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15.
Inscr. 511. N.P.
Fragm. of an agate cameo, d. 3.6. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8,
No. 15. Inscr. 5 11. C. B. M. 8674.
Fragm. of an agate ring, orig. d. 2.7 (of the hole, 0.9), w. 0.96. Nippur
III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. C. B. M. 8675.
Fragm. of an agate ring, Kev. of No. 66.
Irregular block of lapis lazuli, convex on the inscribed surface,
18 X 7.35 X 3. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr.
11.5 X 5.9, 3 col., 63 li. (orig. 69 ?). Sq.
Shagashaltl-Shuriash. Magnesite knob of a sceptre (or conventionalized form of a phallus),
top rounded, base flat, round hole in the centre, h. c. 5, d. 7.
Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. around the top.
N.P.
Bibeiashu. Magnesite knob of a sceptre (or conventionalized form of a phallus),
top rounded, base flat, round hole in the centre, h. 4.6, d. 6.8.
Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. around the top.
C. B. M. 8729.
23
62
Kadashman-Turgu.
24
63
Kadashman-Turgu.
25
64
Kudur-EN-LIL.
25
65
Kadashman-EN-LIL,
25
66
[Kadashman]-EN-
LIL.
25
67
[Kadashman ?]-
Buriash.
25
68
[Kadashman V-
Bu]riash.
52
OLD BABTLONIAK IK80RIPTIONS
Plate. Tkxt. Date.
26 .71 Bibeiashu.
-26 72 [Bibeia-]shu.
26 73 Cassite Dyn.
26 74 Kurigalzu.
26 75 Cassite Dyn.
26 76 ia-asb.
27 77 Cassite Dyn.
27 78 Nazi-Maruttash.
27 79 [Bibeia-]shu.
27 80 c. 1100 B.C.
28
29
30
81
82
Ramman-shum-usur.
MilUShikbu.
83 Bel-nadin-aplu.
31 83 Bel-nadin-aplu.
32 84 Nabopolassar.
Description.
Lapis lazuli tablet, 2.35 X 2.16. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No.
15. Inscr. 5 li. C. B. M. 8682.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 11 x 6.95 X 1.25. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. M. 8680.
Agate cameo, d. c. 1.8. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15.
C. B. M. 8683.
Fragm. of an agate ring, d. 1, w. 1.1. Nippur III, same place as PI.
8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. M. 8684. The ring originally formed
the centre part of a votive cylinder. Cf. PI. 22, No. 50.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 6 X 2.5 X 1.5. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 6 li. C. B. M. 8681.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 5.26 x 2.1. Nippur III,
same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. N. P.
Fragment of a vase in soapstone rock, 8.5 X 8.8 (orig. d. at the bottom
13.2). Nippur V, c. 3 m. below the surface. Inscr. 7 li. C. B. M.
8690.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 6.2 X 6.2 X 1.7. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 9 li. C. B. M. 8685.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 2.35 X 2.85 X 1.5. JVippwr
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 8686.
Fragm. of a reddish granite (boundary) stone of phallic shape, 1. 15.5.
Nippur III, c. 1.5 m. below the surface on the slope of the T. hill
N.W. of Z. Inscr. 2 col., 8 li. Pho. and N. P. Cf. PL XII, 32, 33.
Fragm. of a baked brick, yellowish, very soft, partly covered with
bitumen, 22.5 (fragm.) X 18.4 (fragm.) X 6.9 (orig.). Nippur III,
found out of place in a later structure of the inner wall of Z. (cf.
PI. 29, No. 82; PI. 10, No. 18; PL 13, No. 22; PI. 20, No. 38).
Inscr. written, 15.2 x 8.6, 10 li. C. B. M. 8643.
Brick of baked clay, brown, partly covered with bitumen, 29.6 X
30.2 X 6.7. Nippur III, inner wall of Z. Every brick of this
structure bears the name of Mili-Shikhu with exactly ihe same
inscription (stamped), except a few which belong to Ur-Ninib
(PL 10, No. 18), Bur-Sin (PI. 11, No. 19), Kurigalzu (PL 20, No.
38), Rammanshumusur (PL 28, No. 81). The latter four evidently
formed a part of the ancient structure, and were utilized by
Mili-Shikhu in his restoration of the platform of Z. Inscr.
stamped, 14.8 x 7, 11 li. C. B. M. 8632. Cf. Pinches " An Early
Babylonian Inscription from NifEer " in Hebraica VI, pp. 55-58.
Black limestone tablet, 16.75 x 12.1 x 5.1. Presumably neighborhood
of Babylon. Obv., slightly rounded, 22 li. C. B. M. 13.
The same, Rev., rounded, 24 li.
Cylinder of baked clay, cartridge shaped, hollow, small hole at the
top, dark brown with grayish spots; when found, half covered
with bitumen; h. 15.2, d. of the base 8.85, d. of the hole 2.2.
Babylon. Inscr. 3 coL, 45 -f 65 -[-59 = 169 li. C. B. M. 9090. Cf.
PL XIII, No. 34. The variants have been taken from a mutilated
cylinder (B) in the British Museum, published by Strassmaier in
Z. A. IV, pp. 129-136. Apparent mistakes in Strassmaier's edition
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.
53
Plate. Text.
33 84
34 85
Date.
Nabopolassar.
Nebuchadrezzar II.
35 85
Nebuchadrezzar II.
Description.
are not quoted as variants (of. also Strassmaier in Z. A. IV, pp.
106-113, and Winckler in Schrader's KeilinschrifUiche Bibliothek
III, Part 2, pp. 2-7).
The same, continued.
Fragm. of a baked clay cylinder, barrel shaped, solid, light brown; h.
23.9, d. 8.8 at the top and base, 11.5 at the centre. Babylon. Inscr.
4 col., 23 (orig. c. 48) + 32 (orig. c. 56) + 30 (orig. c. 56) + 28 (orig.
c. 48) = 113 (orig. c. 208) li. C. B. M. 1785. Cf. PI. XIV, No. 35.
According to information of the Arabs the cylinder was found
whole and intentionally broken lengthwise. The other half is
supposed to be in existence.
The same, columns III, IV.
II. Photograph (half-tone) Reproductions.
I
II
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
VIII
IX
1 Sargon I.
2 Sargon I.
3 Naram-Sin.
4-12 Al-usharshid.
13 Al-usharshid.
14 Al-usharshid.
15 Not later than 2400 B.C.
16 Not later than 2400 B.C.
17 Not later than 2400 B.C.
18, 19 c. 2400 B.C.
20
Hammurabi.
Door socket in diorite. Nippur. Cf. PI. 1.
Brick s(amp of baked clay. Rev. Nippur. Cf. PI. 3, No. 3.
Brick stamp of baked clay, Obv. Nippur. Cf. PI. 3, No. 4.
Fragments of vases from which the text on PI. 4 has been obtained.
Nippur. Nos. 4, 5 : dolomite ; Nos. 6, 8, 9, 10 : white marble ; No.
7: red banded marble of agate structure; Nos. 11, 12: white
marble of stalactitic structure. For the restoration of li. 6 fragm.
8860 (white marble) has been consulted.
Fragm. of a vase in reddish nuraulite limestone. Nipjpur. Cf. PI. 5,
No. 6.
Fragm. of a white marble vase with gray and reddish veins here and
there. Nippur. Cf. PI. 5, No. 7.
Fragm. of a white marble slab, 26.65 x 15.8 x 7.9. Abu Eabba. Orig.
inal in Constantinople. Photograph taken from a cast. Inscr. on
both sides and left edge, 391 li. Obv., 9 col., (20 + 25 + 24 + 22 +
22 + 26 + 19 + 23 -f 4 =) 185 li.
The same, Rev., 9 col., (19 + 19 + 23 + 25 +28 + 24 + 25 + 22 +13 =)
198 li.
The same, left edge, 1 col., 18 li.
Tablets of baked clay, reddish brown with black spots. These tab-
lets have a peculiar shape ; they are rounded at both ends and on
the left side, but angular and flat on the right side, as if cut off
from a larger tablet. Tokha. No. 18 : 10.3 x 4.3, th. 1.6 on the
left, 2.2 on the right side. C. B. M. 9042. No. 19 : 10.62 X 4.5, th,
1.7 on the left, 2.55 on the right side. C. B. M. 9041.
Fragm. of an ornamented stamp in the shape of a vase, made of soap-
stone (composed of a green micaceous and very soft mineral, prob-
ably talc). Presumably neighborhood of Babylon. Cf. PI. 15,
No. 27.
54
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.
Plate.
Text.
Date.
IX
21
Buma-Buriash.
X
23
Burna-Buriash.
X
22,24
Nazi-Maruttash.
XI
25
Kurigalzu.
xr
26
Kurigalzu.
XI
27
c. 1350 B.C.
XI
28
c. 1350 B.C.
XII
29-31
c. 1150 B.C.
XII
32,33
c. 1100 B.C.
XIII
34
Nabopolassar.
XIV
3d
Nebuchadrezzar II,
XV
36
1889 A.D.
Description.
Fragm. of a white marble mortar. Presumably neighborhood of
Babylon. Cf. Plates 16, 17.
Knob of a sceptre (or conventionalized form of a pliallus) in ivory.
Side view. Nippur. Cf. Pi. 18, No. 34.
Knobs of sceptres (cf. PI. X, 23) in magnesite. Top views. Nippur.
Cf. PI. 23, Nos. 57, 56.
Inscribed blocli of lapis lazuli, tablet in process of cutting. Nippur.
Cf. PL 18, No. 36.
Fragm. of a votive battle axe iu imitation of lapis lazuli (blue glass).
Nippur. Cf. PI. 20, No. 39.
Fragm. of a votive battle axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 8.32 x
5.65 X 5.1. Nippier III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. C. B. M.
8800.
Fragm. of a votive battle axe in lapis lazuli, 6.4 X 5.7 x 1.5. The
inscription has been erased in order to use the material. Nippur
III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. C. B. M. 8597.
Three small fragments of an inscribed bas relief in a basaltic stone, h.
c.5. Nippur III, on the S.E. side of the Bur-Sin shrine (cf. PI.
11, No. 19).
Fragm. of a reddish granite (boundary) stone of phallic shape. Nip-
pur. Two views of the same stone. Cf. PI. 27, No. 80.
Cylinder of baked clay, cartridge-shaped, hollow, small hole at the
top. Babylon. Cf. Plates 32, 33.
Cylinder of baked clay, barrel-shaped, solid. Babylon. Cf. Plates
34,35.
Plan of the flrat year's excavations at Nippur (February 5 to April 16).
Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, 1.
Pl.l
10
^tMm
l-si-
^Ittl ^pliJIilte
ff»SH<»
$> FpflE
H B
iia
% M^^
^ ^
^^r\i }
U If
B^^ ^ffll^^t^
un^^^^ Mil
tMis&^
25
20
Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 2
10
"^JO!^
^^ffll[(nfnu>
ff3>gN(»
#lWft<K
^JH
^ ^
ISiC3 ■l^'flH tHX^3
i^jHi
Ci ffim:
m 11
B
«HI>
^TpJg^
4{^
■*l^ «)
^a>^^
i5
s
^
>-^
i. 75 .' ♦ is omitted by the scribe .
L. 17 and 21: The duplicate reads
Tran8. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
Pl.S
<III1J^{
^<1SII
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI 4
^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 5
a
^
Co
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 6
^
1
I
L
?
"Si ^
k>
i
hnii
o
«s
♦»
Trana. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 7
12
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 8
^
Trans'. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI 9
Obverse.
w
Reverse.
17
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
18
PI. 10
10
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
Pill
19
l^^^^iS^
^t^f^^^t^^
10
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIIl, I.
Ft. IS
io
10
-»
^^ff>]f t^[lD>
>^X:5>%Ji^
aw <^ If
•m^^ M^
^^-^ <?-i> rt
^
Ji=:^
-m
i^
Jf=;3 1^ ^
i
'I I v|
^r-ffi
4 ^ <^ PI
t-^K|^^[=^
/5
Z. ^ aild 16 .-Ih-asure of the scribe.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. IS
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
Pl.U
23
^M^^
24
25
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1,
PI. 15
26
6 d
)^ 1^ m
m&^^^mm
m^m>m
&
^mv^<y
£_2
.t^^^i^m^
28
29
30
31
32
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 16
33
10
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
Pl.17
15
20
25
33
Continued
^%
W V
. )>
W^
"B"
;'-A-
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 18
34
35
36
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL 19
37
10
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI 20
CO
do
CO
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. SI
40
41
Of. M. 46.
44
43
Reverse of No. 15.
46
42
46
MS^
Cf. No. Jfl.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 22
47
50
v^
m
w-^
Of. No. 74.
53
The second perpendicular
Ihie is a mistake of the scribe
49
m.
^m^-.
^^f^>^^
52
65
48
Erasure of /.fej^
the scribe 5 ' ' ■■'-—
Mistake of scribe
for xgr
57
54
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 23
66
57
68
59
60
62
61
/la^^a
r^~^^
s v¥^^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., ^f. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 24.
f ff ^#e
g^a^
10
<ffi ^ ir^Mf #MM^
16
63
^^^B^ ^^ # If
<
/ i.jywV'
^ a
i^^=- If ^
«
m^ ^)^ ifc^
#6^ #
^r
m
^ H^ # r^ ^^
H-<
P>
5 ^
vS^ — h
r./
a
^
V
1
M' ' 5^^=- ^
j< /^'^ g^
L. 7. Erasure of dingir, ihe second character of ka-dingir-ra,
written by the scribe erroneously before ka.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIIl, 1.
PI 26
s
^
CO
Trana. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 26
70
71
73
74
75
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 27
«30
1^
•O
<2>
CO
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1
PIS 8
81
^T^^rffl tfi^f
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PiS9
82
^^mmr
sTdPi^-l* 1<gl
a;jfl^Tf>^
10
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. SO
10
83
Obverse.
■^£y
15
miw^^r-^
^rt^>^t^
^ Tf gj ^
K»-^ KR
^n xm ^jtj
OBfl^t< Tf^tJ rg^.
'^m^m^->:m^i!r^^^ ^
w ^> K« @' riT >^
^<i^>^ Tr^^'^>MmM^:v^mh^
mmsM^MMMSm^
rg> ^fcf ^r'^^ -^ ^ fc»
^Ka:=»4ffT>^Iffe^i$fe-'-><TB> ^
^^m
^ ^^fefe?ff
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, i.
Fl SI
10
15
83
Reverse.
<^im^wjmr:>)smmv)^ tM^
^■?M^r-' r^
mm^m. E^ <t^ ^
g>#'^r-H^r rrmi^<^ ffgi
r^^ T^ r >^^
^i^^^
mxs^'-mm-tajrymm^^^'^^ ^
m.
mm
^:*fiiMa^^fe£MMffiM±M
i ^hH'^ TTk^
^mh^^m
jj
iMMi^S:
<^
^C Eg
^MMJM___ ^fe;ri4 ^^
rf w/fcirgTH^HT^g^^M: <b;^ ;?r
ff M^<Ft=j> 'm.y^
^— y
>;=
^
its^^^im=- ^M^t^<
V VA yi
t<£
On the left margin of Reverse are traces of ]A p ' > $!^^^^ ^^
On the lower margin of Reverse is ^
PI. 32
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
Majif M-t^ ImI4wI
^1-
'wf
® llf If f SKI lllff II III
-St ^^|#g ^^ M
us
^
^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PISS
^flllE&IS t
•^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe.. N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI. 34
Coll.
86
Gol. II.
10
15
ws m>^
^
ff> #<py?^^^"
■^
SB^M^
f^
'tr^>
ns» mM
t^Q_/^
£ff^3SS
'j^^^^H
i^pmmw
10
15
25
30
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PI.S5
Col. III.
85
Continued
ColIV
10
ifmmmMpW^ -
16
^"^m
ZB
30
EM g=T^gfe^;tl?
'im^^Pi ^^m
iwr
m^^ gcsfK^^ ^f
r^^^^B
I^SM^^,
fe^
m^w^^m-'^m ^
^^^^S^S^
>^^K^W^f^^P^
SS^Si^
^^^mw^^m ^
■5f
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. I
DOOK-SOCKET OP SARGON I.
Nippur,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVlII, 1.
PL. II
(V
Jh^
CLAY STAMPS FOR BRICKS.
Nippur,
2. Sargon I, Reverse. 3. Narim Sin, Obverse.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. Ill
h
ik\
■.Sb'i
VASE PRAGMENTS OP ALUSMARSMID (UKU-MU-USM)
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. IV
IS
VASE TKAGMENT OP ALUSMARSMID (UKU-MU-USH),
Nippur.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. V
14
YA8E FRAGMENT OP ALUSHAKSMID (UKU-MU-USM),
Nippur,
Trans Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. VI
IB
TKAGMENT OF A MARBLE SLAB; OBVERSE.
Abu Mabba.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. VII
16
FRAGMENT OP A MARBLE SLAB; REVERSE,
Abu Mabba.
Trans Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. VIII
19
17, p-RAGMENT OP A MARBLE SLAB i EDGE- Abu Mabba,
18j 19, Tablets of Baked Clay— Yokha.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. IX
20
/
21
20, STAMP or MAMMUKABI, 21, MORTAR Or BURNABURIASM,
Northern Babylonia,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIll, 1.
PL X
23
24
KNOBS or SCEFTRES— Nippur,
28j S4, Magnesite (top view)j Nazi-Mdruttash, 2S. Ivory (side view)j Burnoburiaeh.
I
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIH,
PL. XI
26
28
VOTIVE OBJECTS IN LAFISLAZULI AND IMITATION,
Nippur.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. XII
^ I
32 38
FRAGMENTS OP INSCRIBED BAS-RELIEFS,
Nippur,
Trans, Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. XIII
34
POINTED CLAY CYLINDER OP NABOFOLASSAK
Babylon.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, t.
PL. XIV
,_:x,^vf:-r-:--;t^
35
BARREL-SMAFED CLAY CYLINDER OP NEBUCHADREZZAR II,
Babylon,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, 1.
PL. XV
36
FLAN OP THE FIRST YEAR'S EXCAVATIONS AT NIPFUR,
The Roman numbers indicate the places where excavations were made : the Arabic, the height of the nioiiuds,
■ in metres, above the present level ot the canal bed. About five metres must be added to obtain the actual height
above the plain. Ill Kkur— Bint elAmir (Temple). VII Nimit-Marduk (Wall).
THE BABYLONIAN EXPEDITION
OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
SERIES A: CUNEIFORM TEXTS
EDITED BY
VOLUME I
Part II, Plates 51-100
PHILADELPHIA
Reprint from ihe Transactions of t/ie Amer. Philos. Society, N. S., Vol. XVlll, No. 3
MacCalla & Company Incorporated, Printers
D. Anson Partridge, Printer and Lithographer
1896
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCBIPTIONS
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR
PART II
Plates 36-70 and XVI-XXX
By H. V. HILPKECHT, Ph.D., D.D.
Profenor of Assyrian and Comparative Semitic Philology and Curator of the Babylonian
Museum in the University of Pennsylvania
PHILADELPHIA
1896
TO
CHARLES C. HARRISON", A.M.
Fremont of the University of Pennsylvania
WILLIAM PEPPER, M.D., LL.D.
President of the Department of Arehmology and Palceontology
EDWARD W. CLARK
Chairman of the Babylonian ikction of the Department of Archceology and Palceontology
CLARENCE H. CLARK
Chairman of the Publication Committee and Treasurer of the Department of Arehmology
and Palaeontology
AKD TO ALL OTHEK MEMBERS OF THE
BABYLONIAN EXPLORATION FUND
TO WHOSE LIBERALITY, ENERGY AND HEARTY INTEREST
IN THE
PROGRESS OF SCIENCE
ARE CHIEFLY DUE THE GREAT RESULTS
ACHIEVED AT NUFFAR
Old Babylonian Inscriptions Chiefly from Nippur.
PART II.
PREFACE.
The publication of the history of the American Expedition to Nuifar, announced
in the Preface to the first part of the present work, has been delayed by unforeseen
circumstances. In view of the increased interest ^ in these excavations, it seems now
necessary to summarize the principal results ^ and submit them to a wider circle of
students.
The expedition left America in the summer, 1888, and has continued to the pres-
ent day, with but short intervals required for the welfare and temporary rest of the
members in the field and for replenishing the exhausted stores of the camp. The
results obtained have been extraordinary, and, in the opinion of the undersigned editor,
have fully repaid the great amount of time and unselfish devotion, the constant sacri-
fice of health and comfort, and the large pecuniary outlay, which up to date has reached
the sum of $70,000. Three periods can be distinguished in the history of the exca-
vations.
' Cf. especially the official report on the results of the excavations sent by Hon. A. W. Terrell, the United States
Minister in Constantinople, to his government in Washington, summer, 1894.
' For details cf. the "Bibliography of the Expedition," in Part I, p. 45. To the list there given may be added
Peters, "Some Recent Results of the University of Pennsylvania Excavations at Nippur," in The American Journal
of Archaology X, pp. 13-46, 353-368 (with copious extracts from Mr. Haynes' weekly reports to the Committee in
Philadelphia) ; Hilprecht, "Aus Briefen an C. Bezold," in Zeitschrififur AssyriologieYUl, pp. 386-391 rAssyriaca,
SecVions I, III- VI. A brief sketch of the history and chief results of the " American Excavations in Nuffar " will be
found in Hilprecht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, pp. 45-63.
8 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
First Campaign, 1888-1889— Staff: John P. Feters, Director; H. V. Hil-
precht and R. F. Harper, Assyriologists ; J. H. Haynes, Business Manager, Commis-
sary and Photographer; P. H. Field, Architect; D. Noori an, Interpreter ; Bedry
Bey, Commissioner of the Ottoman Government.^ Excavations from February 6 to
April 15, 1889, with a maximum force of 200 Arabs. Principal results : Trigonomet-
rical survey of the ruins and their surroundings, examination of the whole field by
trial trenches, systematic excavations chiefly at III, Y, I and X." Many clay coffins
examined and photographed. Objects carried away : Over 2000 cuneiform tablets and
fragments (among them three dated in the reign of King Ashuretililani of Assyria),
a number of inscribed bricks, terra-cotta brick stamp of Naram-Sin, fragment of a
barrel cylinder of Sargon of Assyria, insci-ibed stone tablet (PI. 6), several fragments
of inscribed vases (among them two of King Lugalzaggisi of Erech), door-socket of
Kurigalzu; c. 25 Hebrew bowls ; a large number of stone and terra-cotta vases of
various sizes and shapes ; terra-cotta images of gods and their ancient moulds ; reliefs,
figurines and toys in terra-cotta; weapons and utensils in stone and metal; jewelry in
gold, silver, copper, bronze and various precious stones ; a number of weights, seals
and seal cylinders, etc.
Second Campaign, 1889-1890— Staff: J. P. Peters, Director ; J. II. Haynes,
Business Manager, Commissary and Photographer; D. Noorian, Interpreter and Su-
perintendent of Workmen; and an Ottoman Commissioner. Excavations from January
14 to May 3, 1890, with a maximum force of 400 Arabs. Principal results : Examina-
tion of ruins by trial trenches and systematic excavations at III, Y and X continued.
Row of rooms on the S. E. side of the ziggurrat and shrine of Bur-Sin II excavated. Ob-
jects carried away : About 80(X) cuneiform tablets and fi-agments (most of them dated
in the reigns of Cassite kings and of rulers of the second dynasty of Ur); a number of
new inscribed bricks ; 3 brick stamps in terra-cotta and three door-sockets in diorite of
Sargon I ; 1 brick stamp of Naram-Sin ; 61 inscribed vase fragments of Alusharshid ;
2 vase fragments of Entemena of Shii'purla ; 1 inscribed unhewn marble block and
several vase fi-agments of Lugalkigubnidudu ; a few vase fragments of Lugalzaggisi ;
2 door-sockets in diorite of Bur-Sin II ; over 100 inscribed votive axes, knobs, intag-
lios, etc., presented to the temple by Cassite kings ; c. 75 Hebrew and other inscribed
bowls ; 1 enameled clay coffin and many other antiquities similar in character to those
excavated during the first campaign but in greater number.
'D. Q. Prince, of New York, -was the eighth member of the expedition, but during the march across the Syrian
desert he fell so seriously sick that he had to be left behind at Bagdad, whence he returned to America.
' These numbers refer to the corresponding sections of the ruins, as indicated on the plan published in Part I,
PI. XV.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 9
Third Campaign, 1893-1 S96.— Staff: J. H. Haynes, Director, etc.; and an Ot-
toman Commissioner; Joseph A. Meyer, Architect and Draughtsman, from June to
!N"ovember, 18i)l. Excavations from April 11, 1893, to February 15, 189G (with an in-
terruption of two months, April 4 to June 4, 1894), with an average force of 50-60
Arabs. Principal results : Systematic excavations at III, I, II, VI-X, and searching
for the original bed and banks of the Shatt-en-Nil. Examination of the lowest strata
of the temple, three sections excavated down to the water level ; critical determination
of the different layers on the basis of uncovered pavements and platforms ; the later
additions to the ziggurrat studied, photographed and, whenever necessary, removed ;
the preserved portions of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat uncovered on all four sides ; systematic
study of the ancient system of Babylonian drainage ; the two most ancient arches of
Babylonia discovered ; structures built by JSTaram-Sin and pre-Sargonic buildings and
vases unearthed ; c. 400 tombs of various periods and forms excavated and their con-
tents saved. Objects carried away: About 21,000 cuneiform tablets and fragments
(among them contracts dated in the reign of Dungi and of Darius II and Artaxerxes
Mnemon) ; many bricks of Sargon I and Naram-Sin ; the first inscribed brick of
Dungi in Nippur; 15 brick stamps of Sargon I, 1 of Naram-Sin ; inscribed torso of a
statue in diorite (| of life size, c. 3000 B.C.) and fi-agments of other statues of the
same period ; incised votive tablet of Ur-Enlil ; 3 unfinished marble blocks of Lugal-
kigub-nidudu and over 500 vase fi-agments of pre-Sai-gonic kings and patesis ; c. 60 in-
scribed vase fragments of Alusharshid, 1 of Sargon, 3 of Entemena; 1 door-socket
and 1 votive tablet of Ur-Gur ; 1 votive tablet of Dungi ; a number of inscribed lapis
lazuli discs of Cassite kings ; fragment of a barrel cylinder of the Assyrian period ;
fragments of an Old Babylonian terra-cotta fountain in high relief; water cocks, drain
tiles, a collection of representative bricks from all the buildings found in Nippur ; c.
50 clay coffins and burial urns, and many other antiquities of a character similar to
tho?e excavated during the first two campaigns but in greater number and variety.
With regard to the wealth of its results this Philadelphia expedition takes equal
rank with the best sent out from England or France. The systematic and careful
manner of laying bare the vast ruins of the temple of Bel and other buildings in
Nuffar, with a view to a complete and connected conception of the whole, is equal to
that of Layard and "Victor Place in Assyria and something without parallel in previous
expeditions to Babylonia. Only an exhaustive study and a systematic publication of
selected cuneiform texts, which will finally embrace twelve volumes of two to three
parts each, can disclose the manifold character of these documents — syllabaries, letters,
chronological lists, historical fragments, astronomical and religious texts, building
inscriptions, votive tablets, inventories, tax lists, plans of estates, contracts, etc. The
10 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCEIPT10N8
results so far obtained have already proved their great importance in connection with
ancient chronology, and the fact that nearly all the periods of Babylonian history are
represented by inscriptions from the same ruins will enable us, in these publications,
to establish a sure foundation for pateographic research.
Each of the three expeditions which make up this gigantic scientific undertaking
has contributed its own peculiar share to the total results obtained. The work of the
first, while yielding many inscribed documents, was principally tentative and gave us
a clear conception of the grandeur of the work to be done. The second continued in
the line of research mapped out by the first, deepened the trenches and gathered a
richer harvest in tablets and other inscribed monuments. But the crowning success
was reserved for the unselfish devotion and untiring efforts of Haynes, the ideal Baby-
lonian explorer. Before he accomplished his memorable task, even such men as wei-e
entitled to an independent opinion, and who themselves had exhibited unusual cour-
age and energy, had regarded it as practically impossible to excavate continuously
in the lower regions of Mesopotamia. On the very same ruins of Nippur, situated
in the neighborhood of extensive malarial marshes and "amongst the most wild
and ignorant Arabs that can be found in this part of Asia," ^ where Layard himself
nearly sacrificed his life in excavating several weeks without success," ITaynes has
spent almost three years continuously, rsolated fi"om all civilized men and most of the
time without the comfort of a single companion. It was, indeed, no easy task for any
European or American to dwell thirty-four months near these insect-breeding and pes-
tiferous Affej swamps, where the temperature in perfect shade rises to the enormous
height of 120° Fahrenheit (= c. 39° Reaumur), where the stifling sand-storms from the
desert rob the tent of its shadow and parch the human skin with the heat of a furnace,
while the ever-present insects bite and sting and buzz through day and night, while
cholera is lurking at the threshold of the camp and treacherous Arabs are planning rob-
bery and murder — and yet during all these wearisome hours to fulfill the duties of three
ordinary men. Truly a splendid victory, achieved at innumerable sacrifices and under
a burden of labors enough for a giant, in the full significance of the woid, a monumen-
lum cei'e perennius.
But I cannot refer to the work and success of the Babylonian Exploration Fund
in Philadelphia without saying in sorrow a word of him who laid down his life in
the cause of this expedition. Mr. Joseph A. Meyer, a graduate student of the De-
partment of Architecture in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in Boston,
' Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 565.
'Layard, I. c, pp. 556-562. " On the whole, I am much inclined to question whether extensive excavations car-
ried on at Niffer would produce any very important or interesting results" (p. 562).
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 11
had traveled through India, Turkey and other Eastern countries to study the histoi-y
of architecture to the hest advantage. In May, 1894, he met Mr. Haynos in Bagdad
and was soon full of enthusiasm and ready to accompany him to the luins of Nuffar.
By his excellent drawings of trenches, buildings and objects he has rendered most
valuable service to this expedition. But in December of the same year his weakened
frame fell a victim to the autumnal fevers on the border of the marshes, where even
before this the S^^rian physician of- the second campaign and the present wi-iter had
absorbed the germs of malignant typhus. In the European cemetery of Bagdad, on
the banks of the Tigris, he rests, having fallen a staunch fighter in the cause of
science. Even if the sand-storms of the Babylonian plains should eiface his solitary
grave, what matters it? His bones rest in classic soil, where the cradle of the race
once stood, and the history of Assyriology will not omit his name from its pages.
The Old Babylonian cuneiform texts submitted in the following pages have again
been coj^ied and prepared by my own hand, in accordance with the principle set foi-th
in the Preface to Part I. The favorable reception which was accorded to the latter by
all specialists of Europe and America has convinced me that the method adopted is
the correct one. I take this opportunity to express my great regret that this second
part of the first volume could not appear at the early date expected. The fact that
two consecutive summers and falls were spent in Constantinople, completing the reor-
ganization of the Babylonian Section of the Imperial Museum entrusted to me ; that
during the same period three more volumes were in the course of preparation, of which
one is in print now ; ' that a large portion of the time left by my duties as professor
and curator was to be devoted to the interest of the work in the field ; that the first
two inscriptions published on Pis. 36-42 required more than ordinary time and labor
for their restoration from c. 125 exceedingly small fragments ; and that, finally, for
nearly four months I was deprived of the use of my overtaxed eyes, will, I trust, in
some degree explain the reasons for this unavoidable delay. In connection with this
statement I regard it my pleasant duty to express my sincere gratitude to George
Friebis, M.D., my valued confrere in the American Philosophical Society, for his un-
ceasing interest in the preparation of this volume, manifested by the great amount of
time and care he devoted to the restoration of my eyesight.
The publication of this second part, like that of the first, was made possible by
the liberality and support of the American Philosophical Society, in whose Transac-
tions it appears. To this venerable body as a whole, and to the members of its Pub-
lication Committee, and to Secretary Dr. George H. Horn, who facilitated the print-
' Vol. IX, Tablet! Dattd in tJie Reigns of Darius Hand Artaxerxes ilnemon, prepared in connection with my pupil,
Rev. Dr. A. T. Clay, now instructor of Old Testament Tlieology in Chicago.
12 OLD BABYLONIAl^ INSCRIPTIOXS
ing of this work in the most cordial manner, I return my heartiest thanks and my
warm appreciation.
No endeavor has been made to arrange Nos. 86-117 chronologically. Although
on pateographic evidence certain peiiods will be readily recognized in these texts, the
cimeiform materialof the oldest phase of Babylonian history is still too scanty to allow
of a safe and definite discrimination. In order to present the monumental texts from
Nippur as completely as possible, the fragment of a large boundary stone now in Ber-
lin has found a place in these pages. For permitting its reproduction and for provid-
ing me with an excellent cast of the original. Prof A. Erma«, Director of the Royal
Museums, has my warmest thanks. I acknowledge likewise my obligations to Dr.
Talcott Williams of Philadelphia and to Rev. Dr. W. Hayes Wai-d of New York for
placing the fragment of a barrel cylinder of Marduk-shabik-zerim and the impression
of a Babylonian seal cylinder respectively at my disposal. If the text of the latter had
been published before. Prof. Sayce would not have drawn his otherwise very natural
inference {The Academy, Sept. 7, 1895, p. 189) that the Hyksos god Sutekh belongs
to the language and people of the Cassites/ I do not need to offer an apology for in-
cluding the large fragment of Naram-Sin's inscription (No. 120), the only cuneiform
tablet found in Palestine (No. 147) and the first document of the time of Marduk-
ahc-irba,- a member of the Pashe dynasty, in the present series. In view of the great
importance which attaches to these monuments, a critical and trustworthy edition of
their inscriptions had become aa'eal necessity.
The little legend. No. 131, the translation of which is given in the " Table of
Contents," will prove of exceptional value to metrologists. At the same time I call
the attention of Assyriologists to the interesting text published on PI. 63, which was
restoi ed from six fragments found among the contents of as many different boxes of
tablets.
Nos. 124 and 126, which were copied during the time of the great earthquakes in
Constantinople, 1894, belong to the collection designated by me as Coll. Rifat Bey.
Together with several hundred other tablets they were presented to the Imperial Otto-
man Museum by Rifat Bey, military physician of a garrison stationed in the neigh-
' Prof. Say ce's view rests on Mr. Pinclies's hasty transliteration made in connection witli a brief visit to America in
1893 and publislied in Dr. Ward's 8eal Cylinders and Other Oriental Seals (Handbook No. 12 of tlie Metropolitan
Museum of Art in Kew York), No. 391, where the Cassite god S/iugab (— Nergal, cf. Delitzsch, Kosnaer, p. 25, 1. 12)
was transliterated incorrectly by Shutah. I called Dr. Ward's attention to this apparent mistake and gave tbe correct
reading in my Ansyriaca, p. 93, note.
* A boundary stone. The inscription has suflFered much from its long exposure to the rain and sun of Babylo-
nia. The original, which the proprietor kindly permitted me to publish, is in Constantinople. The stone is so import-
ant that it should be purchased by an American or European museum. My complete transliteration and translation of
this text and of Nos. 151 and 153 will appear in one of the next numbers of Zeitschrift Jur Auyriulogie.
CHIEFLY TKOM NIPPUIf. 13
borhood of Tello, and were catalogued by the undersigned writer. His Excellency,
Dr. Hamdy, Director General, and his accomplished brother, Dr. Ilalil, Director of
the Archaeological Museum on the Bosphorus, who in many ways have efficiently pro-
moted the work of the American Expedition, and who by their energetic and intelli-
gent efforts have placed the rapidly growing Ottoman Museum on a new, scientific
basis, deserve my heartiest thanks for permitting the publication of these texts, and
for many other courtesies and personal services rendered during my repeated visits to
the East.
For determining the mineralogical character of the several stones, I am greatly
indebted to my colleagues, Profs. Drs. E. Smith and A. P. Brown, of the University
of Pennsylvania.
The systematic excavations of the last decenniums have revolutionized the study
of ancient history and philology, and they have opened to us long-forgotten centuries
and millenniums of an eventful past. Hieroglyphics and cuneiform inscriptions were
deciphered by human ingenuity, and finally the brilliant reasoning and stupendous
assiduity of Jensen in Marburg have forced the '' Hittite " sphinx to surrender
her long-guarded secret. He who has taken the pains to read and read again and
analyze the results of Jensen's extraordinary work critically and sine ira et studio,
must necessarily arrive at the conclusion as to the general correctness of his system.
I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet, but I see the day not very far, when the
world will wonder — just as we wonder now when we glance back upon the sterile years
following Grotefend's great achievement — that at the close of the nineteenth century
years could elapse before Jensen's discovery and well-founded structure created
any deep interest and received that general attention which it deserves. The beautiful
marble slab recently found near Malatia^ has offeied a welcome opportunity to test the
validity of his theory. But the great desideratum seems to be more material than is
at present at onr disposal. Excavations m the mounds of Malatia would doubtless
yield it. But what European government, what private citizens, will furnish the
necessary funds ? May the noble example given by a few liberal gentlemen of Phila-
delphia find a loud echo in other parts of the world, and may the work which they
themselves have begun and carried on successfully and systematically for several
)ears in Nippur, never lack that hearty support and enthusiasm which characterized
its past history. The high-towering temple of Bel is worthy of all the time and labor
'May 23, 1894, together with two other smaller fragments, and now safely deposited in the Imperial Ottoman Mu-
seum. With Hamdy Bey's permission published in Hilprccbt, Recent Research in Bible Lands, p. 160. Cf. also Ho-
garth in Recueil, XVII, p. 25 f. The inscription cannot be older than 750-700 B.C. The artist took as his motive a
hunting scene from the royal palaces of Nineveh. A critical analysis of the well-preserved text will be given by Jen-
sen in the next number of Recueil.
14
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCKIPTIONS OIIIBFLT PROM NIPPUR.
and money spent in its excavation. Though now in ruins, the vast walls of this most
ancient sanctuary of Shumer and Akkad still testify to the lofty aspirations of a by-
gone race, and even in their dreary desolation they seem to reiJcho the ancient hymn
once chanted in their shadow :
Shadii raia HuBel Imharsag
sha reshashu shamami shanna
apiu ellim Hhurshudu ushshunhu
tna matati kina rimi ekdu rabsu
karnashu kima sharur U^SIiamisli shitlananbiiu
kima kakkab shame nalii main Hhati.
(IV B. 27, No. 2, 15-24.)
February 15, 1896.
O great mountain of Bel, Imkliarsag,
whose summit rivals the heavens,
whose foundations are laid in the briglit abysmal sea,
resting in the lands as a mighty steer,
whose horns are gleaming like the radiant sun,
as the stars of heaven are filled with lustre.
H. Y. HiLPRECllT.
INTRODUCTION.
I.
THE LOWEST STRATA OF EKUR.
The vast ruins of the temple of Bel are situated on the E. side of the now empty
bed of the Shatt-en-Nil, which divided the ancient city of Nippur into two distinct
parts.^ At various times the space occupied by each of tlie two quarters differed in
size considerably from the other. Only during the last centuries before the Christian
era, when the temple for the last time had been restored and enlarged on a truly grand
scale by a king whose name is still shrouded in mystery,^ both sides had nearly the
same extent. This became evident from an examination of the trial trenches cut in
different parts of the present ruins and from a study of the literary documents and
other antiquities obtained from their various strata. As long, however, as the temple
of Bel existed, the E. quarter of the city played the more important role in the history
of Nippur.
Out of the midst of collapsed walls and buried houses, which originally encompassed
the sanctuary of Bal on all four sides and formed an integral part of the large temple en-
(tlosure, there rises a conical mound to the height of 29 m.* above the plain and 15 m. above
the mass of the surrounding dSbris. It is called to-day Biat-el-Amir ("daughter of
the prince")* by the Aiabs of the neighborhood and covers the ruins of. the ancient
ziggurraiu or stage tower of Nippur, named Imgarsag^ or Sagash^ in the cuneiform
'Layard {Niruveli and Babylon, p. 531) and Loftus (TraeeU and Researches, p. 101) stated this fact clearly. Not-
'withstanding their accurate description, on most of our modern maps the site of the city is given inaccurately by
being confined to the E. side of tlie canal.
^ lie cannot have lived earlier than c. 500 B C, and probably later.
'Loftus's estimate of seventy feet (l. c, p. 101) is too low.
'Layard, I. c, p. 557. Cf Loftus, /. c, pp. 102f.
'"Mountain of heaven," pronounced later /mi/r«aj. Cf. .Jensen in SchrtLder'a Ktilin»chr>filiehe Bibliothek III,
Part 1, p. 23, note 5, and Plommel, Sumerisehe Lesettucke, p. 26, No. 306.
• " High lowering " (on the ending s7i cf. Hommel, I. c, p. 141, 2a). Cf. II R. 50, 5-6 a, b. A third name existed
but is broken away on this tablet (4 a). For Imyarsag cf. also IV B. 27, No. 2, 15 and 17.
16 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
inscriptions (ef. Pis. XXIX and XXX). A number of Babylonian kings' applied
themselves to the care of this temple by building new shrines, restoring old walls and
repairing the numerous drains and pavements of the large complex, known under the
name of JSkiir ("mountain house "j.^ But the three great monarchs who within the
last three millenniums before Christ, above all others,^ devoted their time and energy
to a systematic restoration and enlargement of the ziggurrat and its surroundings, and
who accordingly have left consideiable traces of their activity in Nuffar,^ are Ashur-
banapal (G68-626 B.C.),'' Kadashman-Turgu (c. 12.50 B.C.)" and Ur-Gur (c. 2800
B.C.).^ The structures of each of these builders have been, one after the other,
cleared, measured, photographed and examined in all their details by Mr. Haynes, the
intrepid and successful director of the American expedition during the last four years.
He is soon expected to communicate the complete results of his work, illustrated by
numerous drawings and engravings, in Series B of the present publication. There-
fore, referring all Assyriologists to this proposed exhaustive treatise on the history of
the excavations, I confine myself to a brief examination of the lowest strata of ancient
Ekur, which will enable us to gain a clearer conception of the earliest phase of Baby-
lonian history. Whenever it seems essential, Ilaynes's own words will be quoted from
his excellent weekly reports to the Committee in Philadelphia.
UR-GUR.
At the time of King Ur-Gur the ziggurrat of Isippur stood on the 'N.-'W. edge
of an immense platfoi-m, which formed the pavement of the entire temple enclosure.
It was laid about 2.5 m. above the present level of the plain and had an average thick-
ness of 2.40 m. In size,** color and texture the sun-dried and uninscribcd bricks of
» Among them Dungi (PI. 53, No. 133, cf. his brick legend in Part III of the present work), Ur-Ninib (PI. 18,
No. 10, and PI. XXIII, No. 65), Bur-Sia I (PI. 11, No. 19), Ishme-Dagan (PI. 9, No. 17, cf. his brick legend
in Part III), Bur-Sin II (Pis. 12f., Nos. 20-22), Kurigralzu (PI. 20, No. 38), Rammau-sbumusur (PI. 28,
No. 81) Esarhaddon (cf. Vol. X of the present work and Hilprecht in Z. A., VIII, pp. 390f). As to the
earliest builders cf. below.
= Cf. PI. 1, No. 1, 8 ; PI. 2, No. 2, 10 ; PI. 20, No. 38, 7 ; PI. 28, No. 81, 8 ; PI. 29. No. 83, 8 ; PI. 51, No. 131, 8 ;
also Jensen, Kusmologie, pp. 18off.
• ' With the exception of the unknown builder above referred to, who enlarged the base of the early ziggurrat con-
siderably and changed its form entirely by adding a peculiar cruciform structure (each arm being 16.48 m. long by
6.16 m. wide) to the centre of its four sides. Each side appeared to have a gigantic wing.
*Cf. Part I, p. 5, note, and Noldeke in Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 86, note 1.
^Cf. PI. 29, No. 83, and Hilprecht in Z. A., VIII, pp. 889ff.
e Cf. PI. 24, No. 8, 8. His brick legend will be published in Part III.
'Cf. I i?. 1, No. 8f, and Pis. 51f. of the present work.
'28 X 15 4 X 7.7 cm., practically the same size as Ur Gur's bricks found in the Buwariyya of Warka. Cf. Loftus,
I. c, p. 168.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 17
this pavement are identical with the mass of crude bricks forming the body of the
ziggnrrat, while in size and general appearance they closely resemble the burned bricks
which bear the name of Ur-Gur. The natural inference would be that Ur-Gur him-
self erected this large terrace to serve as a solid foundation for his lofty temple. Yet so
long as the inside of the massive ruins has not been thoroughly explored, there remains
a slight possibility that the body of the ziggurrat and the pavement existed before
Ur-Gur, and that this king only I'epaired and restored an older building, using in the
manufacture of his bricks the mould of his predecessor. On the basis of the present
almost convincing evidence, however, I favor the former view and, with Haynes, doubt
very much whether before Ur-Gur's time a ziggurrat existed in ancient Nippur.^
The base of Ur-Gur's zigguri'at formed a right-angled parallelogram nearly 59 m.
long and 39 m. wide." Its two longest sides faced IS .-W. and S.-E. respectively,' and
the four corners pointed approximately to the four cardinal points.^ Three of the
stages have been traced and exposed (ef PI. XXX). It is scarcely possible that
formerly other stages existed above.^ The lowest story was c. 65 m. high, while the
second (receding a little over 4 m. fi'om the edge of the former) and the third are so
■The ancient name of the temple, Ektir, in use even at Sargon's lime, proves nothing against this theory. On the
basis of Taylor's, Loftus's and his own excavations, Haynes inclines to the view that Ur-Gur was the first builder of
ziggurrats in Babylonia. As these two English excavators however did not examine the strata below Ur-Gur's ter-
races, it will be wiser to suspend our judgment for the present, although the absence of a ziggurrat in Tello favors
Haynes's view.
'In size practically identical with Ur-Gur's structure in Muqayyar (ratio of 3 : 3). Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 129.
' The longest sides of the ziggurrat in Ur faced N. E. and S. W. respectively. Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 128.
*"The N. corner is 12° E. of N." (Peters in T/ie American Journal of Arclimology, X, p. 18). The Babylonian
orientation was influenced by the course of the Euphrates and Tigris, as the Egyptian by the trend of the Nile valley
(Hagen in Beitrdge zur Assyriologiell, p. 246, note). The Assyrian word for "North," uh(J,)taau, means "No.
I." From this fact, in connection with the observation th*t in the Babylonian contract literature, etc., in most cases
the upper smaller side (or front) of a field faces N., it follows that the Babylonians looked towards N. in determining
the four cardinal points, and accordingly could not very well designate " West " by a word which means originally
"back side" (Delitzsch, Assyrisches Handmorterbuch, p. 4tf., and Schrader in Sitzuigsberichte der Konigl. Preusaiseh.
Abidemie der Wmensehaflen,, 1894, p. 1301) like the Hebrews, who faced E. Besides, it Is grammatically scarcely
correct to derive JTIIK, a Babylonian loan-word in the Talmud, from a supposed Babylonian a^a{u)rru. instead of
avun-u [for this very reason I read the bird mentioned inU B. 37, 13 e. f., not a-har-s^'z-raM (Delitzsch, I. c, p. 45) but
a-mur■shunu—«2l^!^^'\>i(_ct llMvy ia Heme Semitiquelll, p. 91)]. Consequently the only possible reading is a»»(B)Mrru,
" West," as proposed by Delattre, in view of mdluAmu ri and lUuA-muur-ra in the Tell el-Amarna tablets (cf. also a
Babylonian (sic I) village or town A-mu-ur-riiU in Meissner, Beitrage zun Altbabyloniachen Privatrecht, No. 42, 1 and
21). Independently a similar result was reached by Ilommel in ZeiUchrifl der DeaUehen ilorgenlandischen. OeselUchaft
XLIX, p. 524. note 3.
'No trace of a fourth story could be discovered, and the accumulation o( debris on the top of Bint-el- Amir is not
large enough to warrant the assumption of more than three stages. In Ur Loftus discovered but two distinct stages
(J. c, p. 128).
18 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
utterly ruined that the original dimensions can no more be given.^ The whole ziggur-
rat appears like an immense altar, in shape and construction resembling a smaller one
discovered in a building to the S.-W. of the temple.
As stated above, the body (and faces) of the zigguriat consist of small, crude
biicks,^ with the exception of the S.-E. side of the lowest stage, which had an exter-
nal facing of burned bricks of the same size.^ To preserve such a structure for any
length of time it was necessary to pi-ovide it with ample and substantial drainage.
Thanks to the untiring efforts of Ilaynes, who for the first time examined the ancient
Babylonian system of canalisation critically, we learn that the ziggurrat of Nippur
had water conduits of baked brick^ in the centre of each of the three unprotected
sides. They were found in the lower stage and possibly existed also in the upper *
ruined portions. On all four sides around the base of the walls was a plaster of bitu-
men," 2,75 cm. wide and gradually sloping outward from the ziggurrat towards a
gutter, which carried the water away (cf PI. XXIX, No. 74).' By this very simple
arrangement the falling rain was conducted to a safe dit-tance and the unbaked brick
foundations were thoroughly protected.
Unlike the ziggurrat of Sin in Ur, which had its entrance on the N.-E. side,* the
ascent to the different stages in Nippur was at the S.-E. Two walls of burned bricks,*
3.40 m. high, 16.32 m. long and 7 m. distant from each other, ran nearly parallel,'" at
' The surface of these stages " was covered with a very tenacious plaster of clay mixed with cut straw," in order
to protect them against storm and rain. "In places this plaster is still perfect, while in other places several coatings
are visible, plainly showing that from time to time the faces of the ziggurrat were replastered" (Haynes, Report of
Sept. 1, 1894).
' Cf. above, p. 16, note 8, "Traces of decayed straw were discovered in these bricks " (Haynes, Report of Feb.
9, 1895).
' In Ur the exterior of the whole lower story was faced by Ur-Gur with baked bricks (Loftus, I. c, pp. 129f.),
while in Warka "unlike other Babylonian structures " the lower stage of the Buwariyya "is without any external
facing of kiln-baked brickwork " (Loftus, I. c, p. 167).
* Each c. 1 m. wide by 3.25 deep. To judge from the height of the " buttresses " in Waika, the true meaning of
which Loftus failed to recognize, the lowest stage of the Buwariyya had the same height as that of the ziggurrat of
Nippur. Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 169.
* Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 129.
'This plaster rested upon "a level pavement of two courses of bricks also laid in bitumen, and was 28 cm. thick
where it flanked the walls, and 7.7 cm. at its outer edge " (Oaynes, Report of Feb. 10, 1894).
'The projecting casing wall at the base (1.38 m. high) consists of sixteen courses of (stamped) bricks and was
built by Kadashman-Turgu around the three unprotected sides of the ziggurrat. In the middle distance of the picture
is seen a section of the latest crude brick superstructure (cf. above, p. 16 and note 3) with a tunnel tracing the face of
the lowest stage of Ur-Gur's and Kadashman-Turgu's ziggurrat.
'Loftus, I. c, p. 129.
•Many of which were stamijed with Ur-Gnr's well-known legend I R. 1, No. 9.
"Where they joined the wall of the ziggurrat the distance between them (7 m.) was 1.65 m. greater than at their
outer end.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 19
right angles from the face of the ziggurrdt, into the largo open court, which extended
to the great fortification of the temple. This causeway ^ was filled up with crude
bricks of the same size and mould and formed a kind of elevated platform, from which
apparently steps, no longer in existence, led up to thcs top of the ziggurrat and down
into the open court in front of it.
The whole temple enclosure was surrounded by a large inner and outer wall built
of sun-dried bricks. To the I^.-W. of Ekur " 30 courses of these bricks are still
plainly visible." - They compose the ridge of the outer wall and, like the jjavement
of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat, rest on an older foundation. The complete excavation of the
inner wall will be undertaken in connection with the systematic examination and
removal of the ruins around the ziggurrat.
SARGON AN^D NARAM-SIN.
Immediately below "the crude brick platform of Ur-Gur," under the E. corner
of the ziggurrat, was another pavement consisting of two courses of burned bricks of
uniform size and mould.^ Each biick measures c. 50 cm, in square and is 8 cm. thick.
This enormous size is quite unique among the more than twenty-five different forms of
biicks used in ancient Nippur, and enables us to determine the approximate date of
other structures built of similar material in other parts of the city. Fortunately
most bricks of this pavement are stamped. A number of them contain the well-
known inscription of Shargani-shar-ali, while the rest bears the briefer legend of
Naram-Sin (Pait I, Pis. 3 and II). This fact is significant. As both kings used
the same peculiar bricks, which were never employed again in the buildings of Nip-
pur, and as they are found near together and intermingled in both courses of the same
pavement, the two men must necessarily be closely associated with each other. This
ancient brick pavement becomes therefore a new and important link in the chain of my
arguments in favor of the identity of Shargani-shar-ali ' with Sai-gon I, father of
' Both Uie walls of the causeway and Uiose of the ziggurrat were battered, the batter of the former (1 : 8) being
exactly half the batter of the latter (1 :4), according to Ilaynes'a Report of Feb. 9, 1895. Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 128.
»Hayne8, Report of Sept. 8, 1894.
'Niebuhr's very recent remarks on the historicity of Sargon I and Naram-Sin {Ohronologie der Oeschichte Israels,
uSyyptens, Babyloniens und Assyriens, Leipzig, 1896, p. 75) should never have been raiide after the publication of their
inscriptions in the first part of tlie present work. His iusinuations against the priests of Nippur read like a carnival
joke, in the light of the facts presented in the following sketch.
'Oppert's proposed reading of this name as Bingani sar-iria (Revue d' Assyriologie III, pp. 25f.) is impossible and
was declined in Assyriaea, p. 30, note 1. The original picture of the sign Shar in our name is not " Thifiroglyphe de
I'arbre en feuilles" (Oppert, I. c), but an enclosed piece of land covered with plants, in other words a plantation,
garden, orchard (,kir{i). Cf. Bertin, Origin and Development of the Cuneiform Syllabary, p. 7.
20 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
IS'ararn-Sin' (Part I, pp. 16-19). It was apparently laid bj Sargon and relaid by his
son, Naram-Sin, who utilized part of his father's bricks, and it must therefore be rec-
ognized as the true level of the Sargon dynasty in the lower strata of the temple at
NufFar. No bricks of either of the two kings have been found below it, nor in fact
any other inscribed objects that can be referred to them.^ But another, even more
powerful witness of Naram-Sin's activity in Nippur ^ has arisen from some ruins in
the neighborhood of Ekur.
On the plan of Nuffar published in Part I, PI. XV, a ridge of low insignificant-
looking mounds to the N.-W. of the templfe' is marked YIE. They represent a portion
of Wimit-Marditk, the outer wall of the city.^ Its upper part, as stated above, was
constructed by Ur-Gur. During the summer of 1895 Mr. Haynes excavated the
lower part of this rampart. He selected a piece of 10 m. in length and soon after-
wards reported the following surprising results. The foundation of the wall was placed
on solid clay c. f m. below the water level or c. 5 m. below the plain of the desert. It
was "built of worked clay mixed with cut straw and laid up en masse with roughly
sloping or battered sides " to a total height of c. 5.5 m. Upon the top of this large
base, which is c. 13.75 m. wide, a wall of the same enormous width, made of sun-dried
' More recently (AUorientalische Forsehungen III, p. 238) Winckler refers to Shargani shar ali as the possible his-
torical basis of "the mythical Sargon of Agade. " I trust the day is not very far when he will regard Sargon as histori-
cal and identical with Shargaoi-shar-ali, as I do.
'The brick stamp of Sargon, mentioned below, p. 29, as having been unearthed underneath the wallof Ur-Gur's
archive, indicates that this underground archive or cellar existed at Sargon's time at that very spot and was rebuilt
by Ur-Gur.
•Inscribed burned bricks of Naram-Sin were also found in mound X, on the W. bank of the Shatt en-Nil at a very
Ibw level. All the stamped bricks of Naram-Sin "show evident traces of red coloring on their under or iascribed
face" (Haynes, Report of Nov. 24, 1894).
'Originally these mounds continued a little farther N. W. than they can be traced on the map, until suddenly
they turned to the W., reaching the Shatt en-Nil apparently not far from II. A large open space, " 414 m. long by
276 m. wide and covering more than 28 acres of ground," was enclosed by this wall, by the mounds called VII[ and
by tho temple complex (III). As far as the present evidence goes, this court was never occupied by any brick build-
ings. Its real purpose can therefore only be surmised. According to Haynes (Report of August 3, 189.5) it served as
a caravanserai for the accommodation and safety of pilgrims and their animals. Such a view is possible, but it seems
to me more probable to regard this enclosed place as a court where the numerous cattle, sheep, etc.* received by the
temple administration as regular income and for special sacrifices, were kept and sheltered. Perhaps it served both
purposes. Besides in the time of war the inhabitants of Nippur readily found a safe refuge behind its walls. On the
N. E. side of this court, "at the foot of the enclosing wall, a bubbling spring was discovered. On either side of the
spring are still seen the brick platforms and curbs where the water pots rested." From the size of the bricks, which
"appear to be the half bricks of Narain-Sin, " the spring existed at the time of this great builder. " After the court
had become filled to a depth of about 1 m , a diagonal wall of burned bricks, 5 J m. loag, six courses high, placed on
a raised base of clay, was built before the spring to divert the course of drifting sand and debris from the court."
' Cf. II li. 50, 29 a, b. The inner fortification (dui-u) was called Imgur-Marduk (.ibidem, 28 a, b). Cf. Delitzsch,
Wo lag das Paradiesf p, 231. Botli names seem to be of comparatively late date and cannot be applied to Naram Sin's
fortifications. According to II B. 50, 30f, a, b, two other names existed for the outer wall (sJial^u).
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPTJK. 21
bricks, was raised to an unknown height.^ We may well ask in amazement, Who was
the builder of this gigantic wall, constructed, as it seems, ana tim sate f N"obody else
than the great N'aram-Sin, whom Niebuhr of Berlin finds hard to regard as a histori-
cal person ! Perhaps this scholar will now release me from presenting " wirkliche
Inschriften politischer nnd als solcher glaubhafter^ Natur, damit man ihrer [namely,
Sargon's and Naram-Sin's] einstmaligcn Existenz vollkoramen traae." ^ The bricks
had exactly the same abnormal size as the burned bricks of the pavement below the
ziggurrat and, in addition, although unbaked, bore Naram-Sin's usual stamped inscrip-
tion of thi'ee lines. " They are dark gray in color, firm in texture and of regular form.
In quality they are unsurpassed by the work of any later king, constituting by far the
most solid and tenacious mass of unbaked brick that we have ever attempted to cut
our way through.'" A large number of " solid and hollow terra-cotta cones in great
variety of form and color," ^ and many fragments of water spouts were found in the
debris at the bottom of the decaying wall. The former, as in Ei-ech," were used for
decoration, the latter apparently for the drainage of the rampart.' Possibly there
were buildings of some kind on the spacious and airy summit of the wall,** although
nothing points definitely to their previous existence,
' I bave summarized the details of Haynes's report, according to wUich the original base was c. 5 m. high and
c. 10.75 m. wide. " Directly upon this foundation Naram-Sin began to build his wall, 10.75 m. wide and six courses
high. For some reason unknown to us, the builder changed his plan at this point and widened tlie wall by an addition
of c. 3 m. in thickness to the inner face of the wall, making the entire thickness or width of tlie wall c. 13.75 ra.
This addition, like the original foundation, was built of worked clay mixed with cut straw, and from the clay bed was
built up to the top of the moulded brick wall, making a new and wider base, c. 5.5 m. high by c. 13.75 m. wide. Upon
this new and widened base a new wall of equal width was built by Naram-Sin, whose stamped bricks attest his work-
manship. In the construction of the original base, c. 5 m. high and c. 10.75 m. wide, there is nothing to furnish a clue
to its authorship" (Report of August 3, 1895). In the same letter Ilaynes argues very plausibly, as follows : " Had
the superstructure been built upon the original base, as it was begun, it would naturally appear that the entire struc-
ture from its foundation was the work of Naram-Sin ; yet because Naram-Sin changed the proportions of the wall, it
may with some show of reason be assumed that Naram-Sia himself began to build upon the foundation of a prede-
cessor, perhaps of his father Sargon, with the intention of completing the original design, and that his own ideas then
began to fix upon a different or at least upon a larger plan requiring a wider base to build upon."
^ I am afraid Niebuhr's use of " politisch " und " glaubliaft " as two corresponding terms is very " unhistorisch."
Apparently he I'ls a very curious conception of the significance of an inscribed Babylonian brick as a historical doc-
ument over against the " political inscriptions " too ofien subjectively colored. Cf. Maspero, I'he Dawn of Oiviliza-
Uon, p. 626, with whom I agree.
»CarlNiebuhr, J. c, p. 75.
*Haynes, Report of Sept. 8, 1895.
' " Red and black color are abundant. The hollow cones are of larger size than the solid cones " (Report of July
27,. 1895).
•Cf. Loftus, I. e., p. 187ff.
'It is doubtful whether the cones and spouts belonged to NarSm-Sin's or Ur-Qur's structure; the water spouts
point to the time of the former, however.
'Haynes inclines strongly to the view that there existed "a tier of roonis flush with the outer face of the wall,
and a broad terrace before them overlooking the great enclosure" (Report of Aug. ,3, 1895). This view is closely
22 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
The construction of so gigantic a fortification by Naram-Sin proves the political
importance of Nippur at an early time, and reveals, in its own peculiar way, the relig-
ious influence which Ekur exercised in the ancient history of the country. A number
of scattered references in the oldest cuneiform inscriptions extant — as, e. g., the fact
that the supreme god of Lagash is called gad Inlil by several kings and governors of
Tello,^ that Edingiranagin- bears the title mupadi Inlila-ge, that Urukagina'^ as well as
Entemena ^ built a shrine to InlU, that the rulers of Kish,'* Erech" and of other early
Babylonian centres,' who lived about the period of the kings of Shirpurla, paid their
respect to Bel, repeatedly making valuable offerings and numerous endowments, and
claimed as patesi gal Inlila * the right of chief officer in his sanctuary and domain —
and the interesting jjassage in the bilingual text of the creation story,'^ where Nippur
seems to be regarded as the oldest city of Babylonia, find a welcome confirmation in
the results obtained by our systematic excavations.
A comparatively small portion of the enormous temple area has so far been thor-
oughly examined, although for more than five years the constant hard labor of fifty to
four hundred Arabic workmen has been devoted to its exploration. The results have
already been extraoidinary ; they will become more so when our woi'k shall be com-
pleted. That no independent buildings of Sargon have as yet been discovered will be
partly explained in the light of the statement just made. The large number of Sar-
gon's brick stamps^" excavated at different times chiefly within the temple enclosure,
connecled with his theory as to the use of the court, above referred to. " In a hot country, infested with robbers and
swarming willi insects, the rooms on the wall and the terrace in front of them would have offered admirable sleeping
quarters for the hosts of pilgrims at Bgl's most famous shriue (ibidem')."
^E. g ,hy Urukagina [De Sarzec, Decomertes en ChaldSe, p. XXX, squeeze (cf. p. 109f.), col. I, 2 ; and PI. 5,
No. 1, 2f. (also Amiaud, on p. XXX)], £aaiiatuina I [inscription published by Heuzey in Revue d' Assyriologie
III, p. 3 , 2], Entemena [Be Sarzec, I c, PI. 31, No. 3, col. I, 2 ; and Bevue d' Assyriologie II, p. 148, col. I, 2],
£nanatunia II [De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 6, No. 4, 2].
2 De Sarzec, I. c , PI. 31, No. 2, col. I, 5f. (cf. Heme d' Assyriologie 11, p. 81).
»De Sarzec, I. c, PI. S, No. 1, 35-38 ; PI. Si, col. IH, 1-3 ; squeeze (p. XXX), col. Ill, 7-9.
*De Sarzec in Revue d' Assyriologie 11, p. 149, col. IV, 4-7 (to be supplemented by De Sarzec, Decouvertes, pas-
sages quoted in the preceding note).
* Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptions, Part II, PI. 43, No. 3. Cf. PI. 46, No. 108.
«nilprecht, /. c. Pis. 38-42, No. 87.
' B. g., Ur, cf. Hilprecht, I. c. Pis. 36f., No. 88 ; PI. 42, No. 88 and No. 89. Cf. also PI. 42, No. 90 ; PI. 43,
Nos. 91f.
« Lugalzaggis'i. Cf. Hilprecht, I. c, PI. 38, No. 87, col. I, 15f.
• Pinches in Records of tlie PasC, Vol. VI, p. 109, 6.
'"Not less than eighteen (either whole or fragmentary) terracotta stamps have been unearthed, seven of them
within one fortnight in December, 1895. Most of them are without handles. Apparently several broke while in use
at Sargon'slime and were then thrown away. Otheiswere doubtless broken intentionally in connection -with Ihe
disastrous event mentioned below, p. 30.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 23
his Stamped bricks ^ found under the platform of Ur-Gur, and the regular title Mni'^
Eknr hit Bel in Nippur occurring in all his inscriptions from Kuffar^ indicate that
important structures, similar to those of his son, must have existed in some part of
these high and extended accumulations. The perplexing question is, at which partic-
ular spot have we to search for them ? And shall we ever really find them r* Just as
the bricks of Ur-Gur lie directly upon the splendid structiu-e of Naram-Sin in the
large enclosing wall {Nimit-Mardulc), so "the great crude brick platform of Ur-Gur's
ziggurrat practically rests upon Naram-Sin's pavement."* This fact is of importance,
for we draw the natural conclusion from it that all the buildings that once stood upon
this latter pavement were razed by Ur-Gur, in order to obtain a level ground for his
own extended brick pavement, which served as the new foundation for Ekur.
THE PKE-SARGOmC PEEIOD.
The average accumulations of debris above the pavement of K'aram-Sin measure
a little over 11 m. in height and cover about 4000 years of Babylonian history. Have
any traces of an earlier temple beneath the pavement of the Sargon dynasty been
found in Nuffar? Several sections on the S.-E. side of the ziggurrat have been exca-
vated by Mr. Haynes down to the water level.* I am therefore fully prepared to make
the following statement, which will sound almost like a fairy tale in the ears of Assyr-
iologists and historians who have been accustomed to regard the kingdom of Sargon
as legendary and the person of Naram-Sin as the utmost limit of our knowledge of
ancient Babylonian history. The accumulations of debris from ruined buildings, partly
preserved drains, broken pottery and many other remnants of human civilization
between ]S"aram-Sin'8 platform and the virgin soil below, are not less than 9.25 m.
The age of these rains and what they contain can only be conjectured at the present
'The fragment of the first Sargon brick excavated in Nuffar at the beginning of 1894 is published on PI. XXI,
No. 63. It proves that Sargon did not only stamp his legend upon the bricks but sometimes wrote it. For a stamped
specimen of. Part III.
' Written ba- Q1M:= (ba-)bani or (ba-)ban, in other words expressed by an ideogram and preceding phonetic com-
plement (the earliest example of this kind in Semitic cuneiform texts). Cf. Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 70, note (end).
Examples for this peculiar use of a phonetic complement are extremely rare and will be found in Assyriaea, Part II.
' Pis. 1-3, Nos. 1-8.
* Haynes, Report of Aug. 3, 1895. In advance I warn all those who seem to know Babylonian chronology
better (?!) than KingNabonidos of Babylon, not to use this fact against the king's 3200 years, and to keep in mind
that also Ur-Gur, Kadashman-Turgu and AshurbSnapal follow each other immediately in their work at the ziggurrat.
'To illustrate the amount of time, patience and labor needed for the systematic exploration of these lowest strata,
it may be mentioned that one of the sections excavated contained "more than 60,000 cubic feet " of earth, which had
to be carried away in basketfuls a distance of 120 m. and at the same lime to be raised to a height of 15-24 m. Haynes,
Report of Oct. 5, 1895.
24 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
time. But as no evidence of an ancient ziggurrat previous to Ur-Gur and Naram-
Sin has been discovered, the accumulations must have necessarily been slower and
presuppose a longer period than elapsed between Naram-Sin and the final destruction
of Ekur in the first post-Christian millennium. I do not hesitate, therefore, to date
the founding of the temple of Bel and the first settlements in Nippur somewhere
between 6000 and 7000 B.C.,^ possibly even earlier. I cannot do better than repeat
Haynes' own words, vpritten out of the depth of this most ancient sanctuary of the
world so far known : " We must cease to apply the adjective earliest to the time of
Sargon or to any age or epoch within 1000 years of his advanced civilization."^ " The
golden age of Babylonian history seems to include the reign of Sargon and of Ur-
Gur." ^
Somewhat below the pavement of Naram-Sin, between the entrance to the zig-
gurrat and the E. corner, stood an altar of sun-dried brick, facing S.-E. and 4 m. long
by 2.4G m. wide. The upper surface of this altar ' was sui-rounded by a rim of bitu-
men (18 cm. high), and was covered with a layer of white ashes (G.5 cm. thick),
doubtless the remnant of burned sacrifices. To the S.-W. of it Haynes discovered a
kind of bin built of crude brick and likewise filled with (black and white) ashes to the
depth of c. 30 cm.*^ At a distance of nearly 2 m. from the altar (in front of it) and
c. 1.25 m. below the top was a low wall of bricks, whose limits have not yet been
found. Apparently it marked a sacred enclosure around the altar, for it extended far
under the pavement of Naram-Sin '^ and reappeared under the W. corner of the ziggur-
rat.' The bricks of which this curb was built are plano-convex in form.^ They are
laid in mud seven courses (= 45 cm.) high," the convex surface, which is " curiously
creased lengthwise," being placed upward in the wall.
At a distance of 4.G2 m. outside of this low enclosure and c. 36 cm. below its
bottom stood a large open vase in teria-cotta with rope pattern'" (cf. PI. XXVII, No.
72). It will serve as an excellent specimen of early Babylonian pottery in the fifth
millennium before Christ. Undistuibed bj' the hands of later builders, it had remained
' A similar conclusion was reached by Peters in The American Journal of Archaeology X, pp. 45f.
2 Report of August 30, 1895.
^ Report of August 3, 1895.
* Which was 0.92 m. below the level of NaramSin's pavement.
' Haynes, Report of Feb. 17, 1894 (also Aug. 24, 1895). Ilaynes's chemical analysis of the white ashes showed
evident traces of bones.
^Tlie facts concerning this curb have been gathered from Haynes's Reports of Feb. 17 and March 17, 1894;
Aug. 8, 1893.
' Cf. Peters, The American Journal of Archaology X, pp. 31 and 44.
* WiUi an average length and breadth of 24.5 X 18 cm.
'"Being placed lengthwise and crosswise in alternate courses" (Haynes, Report of March 17, 1894).
"• Haynes, Report of Aug. 24, 1895.
CniEFLT FROM NIPPUK. 25
in its original upright position for more than GOOO years, and it was buried under a
mass of earth and debris long before Sargon I was born and I^arara-Sin fortified the
temple of Nippur.^
A second vase of similar size but different pattern^ was discovered 77 cm. below
the former and nearly double the distance from the ancient brick curb. There is little
doubt in my mind that both vases, which stood in front of the altar, on its S.-S.-E.
side, one behind the other as one approached it, served some common purpose in con-
nection with the temple service at the pre-Sargonic time.
Another section of earth adjoining the excavation which had yielded these
remarkable results was removed by Haynes.
To the S.-E. of the altar described above, almost exactly under the E. corner of
Ur-Gur's ziggnrrat and immediately below the pavement of !N^aram-Sin, stood another
interesting structure.^ It is 3 38 m. high,^ 7 m. square, " with a symmstrleal and
double reentrant angle at its northern corner and built up solidly like a tower." Its
splendid walls, which exhibit no trace of a door or opaning of any kind, are made
of large unbaked bricks of tenacious clay ' somewhat smaller in size than those of
Naram-Sin's rampart. While examining the surroundings of this building, Haynes
found ten basketfuls of archaic water vents and fragments thereof on its S- H>. side
and on a level with its foundation. His curiosity was aroused at once, and after a
brief search underneath the spot where the greatest number of these terra-cotta vents
and cocks had been gathered, he came upon a drain which extended obliquely under
the entire breadth of this edifice. At its outer or discharging orifica hs found the
most ancient keystone ai"ch yet known in the history of architecture. The question
once asked by Perrot and Chipiez''' and answered by them with a "probably not," has
been definitely decided by the American expedition in favor of ancient Chaldaea. The
bottom of this valuable witness of pre-Sargonic civilization" was c. 7 m. below the
level of Ur-Gur's crude brick platform, 4.57 m. below the pavement of N'aram-Sin,
and 1.25 m. below the foundations of the aforesaid building. The arch is 71 cm, high,
elliptical in form, and has a span of 51 cm. and a rise of 38 gm. Of PI. XX VII E,
'It stood 3.05 m. below the pavement of NarSm-Sin.
' Iq the form of a large jar, its diameter in the centre being larger Ihjn that at the top (Haynes, Report of Aug.
24. 1893).
'The following facts have been gathered from Haynes's Reports of Oct. 13, Nov. 24, 1894.
*It8 foundations are therefore 3.33 m. below the level of NaramSin's pavement.
' "Thoroughly mixed with finely cut straw and well kneaded."
' A Hittory of Art in Chaldcea and Assyria, Vol. II, p. 234.
' Haynes, Reports of Oct. 13, 20, Nov. 24, 1891 ; Jan. 13, March 2, 1895.
26 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
No. 73.' The bricks of which it is constructed are well baked, plano-convex in shape,
and laid in clay mortar, the convex side being turned upward. A few months after
its discovery the arch was forced out of shape, " probably from the unequal pressure
of the settling mass above it, which had been drenched with rain water."
Whether the altar, the two laige vases and the massive building, under which the
ancient arch was found, had any original connection with each other, is at present
impossible to prove. Accoiding to my calculations and our latest news from the field
of excavation, the bottom of the lower vase and the foundation of the massive build-
ing were not on the same level. The difference between them is nearly 0.5 m. As
the highest vase, however, stood 77 cm, above the other, and as the section S.-E. from
them has not yet been excavated, it is highly probable that a third vase stood at some
distance below the second. However this may be, so much we can infer from the
facts obtained even now, that an inclined passage from the plain led alongside the
two vases to the elevated enclosure around the solitar}^ altar. I am therefore disposed
to assign to the tower-like building, the character of which is still shrouded in mys-
tery, the same age as the altar, curb and vases. The keystone arch and drain, on the
other hand, are doubtless of a higher antiquity. Whether the 3200 years given by
Nabonidos as the period which elapsed between his own government and that of
Sargon I, be correct or not, the arch cannot be placed lower than 4000 B.C., and in all
probability it is a good deal older.
The two sections which contained all the buildings and objects described above
were carried down to the virgin soil, where water stopped cur progress. A third
section removed in their neighborhood yielded similar results. But it is impossible to
enumerate in detail all the antiquities which were uncovered below the S.-E. side of
the ziggurrat. The lowest strata did not furnish any ti-easures similar to those found,
in the upper layers ; they showed a large proportion of black ashes and fine charcoal
mingled with earth, but they also produced many smaller objects of great interest and
value, especially fragments of copper, bronze and terra-cotta vessels. Several pieces
of baked clay steles, bearing human figures in relief upon their surface, will be treated
at another place and time." An abundance of fragments of red and black lacquered
' A kind of pointed arch of unbaked brick (60 cm. high and 48 cm. wide at the bottom) was found by Hayues in
mound X (of. PI. XV), on the S. W. side of the canal bed. From the depth in which it was discovered, Haynes
reasoned correctly that it was older than 2O0O B.C. From the inscribed objects excavated in connection with it, I
determined that it must have existed at the lime of the dynasty of Isin (c. 2500 B.C.). In all probability it dates back
to Ur-Gur's period. For the wall in which this areli is placed was built of the same sundj-ied bricks which compose
Uie body of the ziggurrat (Haynes, Reports of April 27, Dec, 21, 1895). Tor the general form of this pointed arch
cf. Perrotand Cliipiiz, I. c, p. 229, Fig. 93.
'One of them was found at a depth of 7 m. below the pavement of Naiara-Sin and 3.44 m. lower than the bottom
of the arch, wiihin about 2 m. of the lowest trace of civilization (Haynes, Ri-port of Sept. 7, 1895). Another was
discovered 7.70 ra. below NaiaraSin's pavement (Report of Sept. 14, 1895).
CniEPLY FROM NIPPUR. 27
pottery was discovered at a depth of 4.0 m. to 8 m. below the pavement of N"aram-
Sin.^ " Had these pieces been found in the higher strata, one would unhesitatingly
declare them of Greek origin, or at least ascribe them to the influence of Greek art."
For they are, as a rule, of great excellence and in quality far superior to those found
in the strata subsequent to the period of Ur-Gur.
The results of our excavations in the deepest strata of Ekur will change the cur-
rent theory on the origin and antiquity of the arch, will clear our views on the devel-
opment of pottery in Babylonia, and will throw some welcome rays on one of the
darkest periods of history in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates. But first of all,
they again have brought vividly and impressively before our eyes the one fact that
Babylonian civilization did not spring into existence as a deus ex machinaj that behind
Sargon I and is'^aram-Sin there lies a long and uninterrupted chain of development cov-
ering thousands of years ; and that these two powerful rulers of the fourth millennium
before Christ, far from leading us back to " the dawn of civilization," are at the best
but two prominent figures from a middle chapter of the early history of Babylonia.
' A vase of ordinary gray pottery, 23 cm. high, was found 7.40 m. below this pavement "directly beneatli the line
of the very ancient curb, and near to a perpendicular let fall from the E. corner of the altar." The stratum which
produced this vase, according to Haynes, "was literally filled with potsherds of small size and generally brick red in
color " (Report of Sept. 14, 1895).
28 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCUIPTIONS
II.
THE INSCRIBED MONUMENTS OF SARGON'S
PREDECESSORS.
Although more than 500^ mostly fragmentary antiquities of Sargon and his
predecessors have been excavated in Nuffai', it may at first seem strange that. nearly
all of them were discovered out of place, above the platform of Ur-Gur. But if we
examine the details more closely, we will easily find the explanation of this remarkable
fact. Almost all these monuments that, on the basis of strong paheographic evi-
dence and for various other reasons, must be ascribed to this early phase of Babylo-
nian history,^ wei'e found in a stratum on the S.-E. side of the ziggurrat, between the
facing of the latter and the great fortified wall which surrounded the temple. This
stiatum varies in thickness. "In some places it lies directly upon the crude brick
pavement of Ur-Gur, while in other places it reaches a height of c. 1 m. above this
platfoi m." ' Few of the objects found were whole, the mass of them was broken and
evidently broken and scattered around on purpose. Most of the fragments are so
small that during the last three years it needed my whole energy and patience, com-
bined with much sacrifice of the eyesight, to restore the important insciiptions pub-
lished on the following pages (particularly Pis. 36-42). The apparent relation in
which this stratum stands to a peculiar building in its immediate neighborhood will
furnish the key to the problem.
AN ANCIENT TEMPLE ARCHIVE.
Directly below the great fortification wall of the temple to the S.-E. of the zig-
gurrat, Mr. Haynes discovered recently a room 11 ra. long, 3.54 m. wide and 2.60 m.
high. It showed nowhere a door or entrance in its unbroken walls, and there can be
no doubt "that the room was a vault entered by means of a ladder, stairway or other
perishable passage from above." This structure "was erected on the level of
Naram-Sin's pavement," and yet it was made of the same bricks which compose the
•Stamped bricks being excluded.
'Cf. proof below.
» Uaynes, Report of Dec. 14, 1895.
CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUR. 29
body of Ur-Gui's ziggurrat'and platform. How is this discrepancy to be explained?
By the simple assertion, suggested already by the absence of a door in the walls of the
building, that the I'oom was underground, a cellar reaching from the top of Ur-Gur's
platform down to the level of [N^aram-Sin's pavement.^ The access from above being
on the Ur-Gur level, it is clear that the vault was built by this king himself Our
interest in the unearthed building is still increased by the discovery of another smaller'^
room of exactly the same constiuction and material below it. Separated from the
later vault by a layer of earth and dehris 60 cm. deep, it lies wholly below the level
of Naram-Sin's platform. In its present form this lower cellar cannot, however,
antedate Sargon, nor was it built by this king himself or by his immediate successor.
From the fact that the bricks of both rooms are identical " in size, form and general
appearance,"' and that a brick stamp of Sargon was discovered beneath the founda-
tions of the lower walls, we draw the following conclusions : (1) At the time of Sargon
a cellar existed at this very spot, as indicated by the presence of his stamp below the
level of his dynasty ; * (2) Ur-Gur found and used this cellar, but rebuilt it entirely
with his own bricks. And as he raised the foundation of his zigguirat far above the
old level, he also raised the walls of the old chamber to the height of his new platform.
(3) For some unknown reason — probably because the pressure of the neighboring
temple fortifications from above, together with the yearly rains, the principal enemies
of Babylonian sun-dried brick structures, had ruined the vault "^ — he changed its foun-
dation afterwards and laid it on a higher level, at the same time widening the space
between its two longer walls.
It can be easily proved that this underground building was the ancient storeroom
or archive of the temple. " A ledge c. 0.5 m. wide and 0.75 m. above the floor extended
entirely around the room, serving as a shelf for the storage of objects in due form and
order."^ "A ciicular clay tablet together with two small tablets of the ordinary form
and five fragments were found on it,'" and five bi-ick stamps without handles were
lying within its walls. And finally a similar room filled with about 30,000 clay tab-
lets, inscribed pebbles, cylinders, statues, etc., was discovered by de Sarzec, 1894, in a
'The height of its walls agrees with the distance l)etween the tops of Ur-Gur's and Naratn-Sln's platforms.
''It is only 3.15 m. wide, and the walls are 92 cm. high in their present ruined condition.
' Haynes, Report of Dec. 14, 1895.
« Of. above, p. 20, note 2.
°0n this theory it can be easily explained why a few tablets were found on the ledge of the lower room and
brick stamps without handles were discovered on the floor of the same room.
•Haynes, Report of Dec. 14, 1895. This ledge existed in both chambers. It was built up with the walls and
consisted of crude bricks capped by a layer of burned bricks (Report of Dec. 21, 1895).
'In Ihe lower vault (Haynes, Report of Dec. 21, 1895). In the midst of this lower chamber was "a hemispheri-
cal basin of pottery set in a rim of stone," the original use of which is still unknown (Report of Dec 14, 1835).
30 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
small mound at Tello,^ by which the true character of our building is determined be-
yond question. The French explorer was more fortunate than Mr. Haynes in finding
his archive undisturbed, but it will always remain a serious loss to science that the
contents of the archive of Tello could not have been saved and kept together.-^
The vault of Nippur had been robbed by barbarians of the third millennium before
Christ, as I infer from the following facts and indications :
1. Nearly all the objects above referred to were excavated from a well-defined
stratum in the neighborhood of this storeroom. From the position in which they were
found, from the fact that none, except door-sockets in diorite, were whole, and from the
extraordinaiily small size of most fragments, it becomes evident that the contents of
the archive were broken and scattered intentionally, as previously stated.
2. Three of the rulers of the dynasty of Isin built at the temple of Nippur," and
an inscribed brick of Ur-Ninib was found among the fragments recovered from this
stratum. It is therefore clear that the destruction of the vases, brick stamps, etc., did
not antedate Ur-Ninib's government. As no document later than his time has been
rescued from this stratum, it is also manifest that the deplorable disaster occurred not
too long after the overthrow of his dynasty.
3. The archive existed however as late as the second dynasty of Ur. For Bur-
Sin II wrote his name on an unhewn block of diorite, presented to Bel many centuries
before by Lugal-kigub-nidudu, a pre-Sargonic' king of Ur and Erech, and turned it into
a door-socket for his own shrine in Nippur.*^ That the archive could not have been de-
sti-oyed in the brief interval between Ur-Ninib and Bur-Sin II, so that the latter
might have rescued his block from tlie ruins, results from a study of the general his-
tory of that period, however scanty our sources, and of the history of the city of Nip-
pur at the time of Ine-Sin, Bur-Sin II and Gimil (Krit)-Sin" in particular. All the
•Cf. Heuzoy, Heme d' Assyriologie III, pp. 65-68. The description of this archive chamber excavated in Tello
may find a place here : " Ces plaquettes de terre cuite, regulierement supcrposees sur cinq ou six rangs d'epaisseur,
remplissaieut des galeries etroites, se coupant a angle droit, construites en briques crus et garnies des deux c6tea de
banquettes, sur lesquelles s'etendaient d'autre couches de semblables monuments. Les galeries formaient deux
groupes distincts, mais voisins I'un de I'autre."
' The thievish Arabs seem to have scattered their rich harvest everywhere. So far, I have examined about 3000 ot
these tablets myself. But not less than c. 10,000 have been offered to me for sale by dealers of Asia, Europe and
America within the last year. They all come from Tello. Cf. Ililprecht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, p. 80.
' Cf. Part I, pp. 37 f. and above, p. 16, note 1.
*For the proof of this statement cf. below.
»Cf. PI. 13, No. 31, and Part I, "Table of Contents," p. 49. Bur-Sin II repeated only what had been done by
Sargon I long before. Cf. Part I, "Table of Contents," p. 47 (No. 1), and below.
'That GirailSin was the direct successor of Bur-Sin II follows from PI. 58, No. 127, and that Ine-Sin was the im-
mediate predecessor of Bur-Sin was inferred by Scheil from a contract tablet (^Reeueil XVII, p. 38, note 3). The men-
tion of the devastation of Shashru on this Tello tablet is only of secondary importance in Itself, as the same event
CHIEJFLY FROM NIPPUR. 31
three kings mentioned devoted their attention to the interests of Inlil and Ninlil and
other gods wort-hiped in Nippur, as we learn from excavated bi'icks and door- sockets
(PI. 12 I); from two chronological lists (PI. 55, No. 125, and PI. 58, No. 127),^ and
from the large number of dated contracts discovered in Tello, Nuffar and other Babylo-
nian mounds.'' That the country as a Avhole was quiet and enjoyed peace and prosper-
ity under their government, is evident from the many business contracts executed
everywhere in Babylonia and from ceitain statements contained in them. The con-
stant references to successful expeditions cairied on by Ine-Sin against the countries of
KarJiar''', HarsTii^^, Simurrum^' ,'^ Lnlubu''', Anslian'''' and Shashru''\^ by Bur-Sin II
occurred at other limes (e. g., in Bur-Sin's sixtli year, PI. 58, No. 127, Obv. 6). But the fact that this conquest is
placed between Bur Sin's accession to the throne and a very cliaracteristic event at the close of Ine-Sin's govern-
ment (cf. PI. 55, No. 125, Rev. 18-21) settles the question. Ine-Sin ruled at least forty-one years, according to the
chronological list on PI. 55. As, however, a part of it is wanting, it will be safe to assign a reign of c. 50 years to
him. Bur-Sin II ruled at least twelve years (PI. 58, No. 127), and in all probability not more than sixteen to eighteen
years. That the events mentioned on the two tablets are arranged chronologically, is beyond question. For (1)
events which happened more than once are quoted in their consecutive order, but often separated from each other by
other events which occurred between them. Cf. PI. 55, Rev. 3 and 10 ; Rev. 4, 5 and 11, and especially Obv. 5 and
Rev. 15 (between the two similar events lie twenty-eight years!). (2) In case a year was not characterized by an
event prominent enough to give it its name, such a year is quoted as "joined to" or " following" the previous year in
which a certain event look place (««A-sa). Cf. PI. 55, Rev. 7-8, U-12, 13-14, 16-17, 18-20. (3) As we expect in a
list arranged chronologically, PI. 58, No. 127, opens with "the year in which Bur-Sin became king." If the king
accomplished something worth mentioning in the year of his accession, this deed was added. Cf. PI. 58, No. 127,
Jiuv. 4:-. JJu divffirQimU-dingtrSin lugal Uruml^'i-mage mada Za-ap-shalV^ mugul-a "In the year when (Gimil-Sin
became king and ==) King GimilSin brought evil upon the land of Zapshali."
'Cf. also Peters in The American Jmirnal of Arehttology X, p. 16 f.
'Of. No. 125, Obv. 2, 4, 10, 17, 18 (Ine Sin), No. 127, Obv. 3, Rev. 3 (Bur-Sin II).
» Cf. for the present Scheil in liecueil XVII, p. 37 f.
* On a tablet in Constantinople written at the time of Ine-Sin, we read the following date : mu Simu-ur-ru-um>^ Lu-
lu bu'^bagul. From the fact that Simurru and Lulvbuare here mentioned together, Scheil (^Recueil XVII, p. 38) draws
the conclusion that "Simuru se trouvait done dans les memes parages que la ou la stele deZohab fixe lepaysdeLulubi."
Tiiis assertion is by no means proven. The king may have conquered two countries far distant from each other in the
SHme year. I call attention to Scheil's theory in order to prevent conclusions similar to those wliich for several years
were drawn fiom the titles of Nebuchadrezzar I (col. I, 9-11: tha danna indiu Lulvli unhamkilu ina kakki, kashid
mdtuAmuni, thalilu KasJiM) and led to curious conceptions about the land Amurii (cf. «. g. Eduard Meyer, Geschichte
dea AUerthumt, p. 829, and especially WinckUr, Vntertvchuvgen, p. 37, note 2). Homrael's identification of Simurru
with Simyra in Phenicia is by far more probable (Avu der babyloniichen Alter tumskunde, p. 9).
»P1. 55, No. 125, Rev. 3; resp. Rev. 0, 10; res p. Rev. 4, 5, 11 ; resp. Scheil, I. c , \). 37 (beginning); resp. Rev. 13;
rcsp. Rev. 21. In connection with Anshan it may be mentioned that Scheil in liecueil XVII, p 38 (especially note 6),
translated PI. 55, No. 125, Rev. 9 : mu dumu sal lugal pa te-si An-sha-anM .ge batug by "annee ou la fille du roi
dcviiit patesi dans le pays d'Anshan." Notwithstanding that Hommel {Aus der babylonischen Altertumnkunde, p. 9)
and Sayce (in TUe Academy of Sept. 7, 1895, col. b) reproduce this translation, which grammatically is possible, I
reject it on the ground that there is no evidence that in ancient Babylonia women were permitted to occupy the higli-
est political or religious positions independently, and translate : "In the year when the patesi of Anshan married a
daughter of the king (Jtitg = olazu, "to take a wife, to marry," cf. Deliizsch, Assyriscfies IJanduorltrbuch, p. 43).
32 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
against Urhillurd'\ Shashru"' and Iiite-tar(?)hu\^ and by Gimil (Kat)-Sin against
Zapshali''^'^ testify to the same effect. Moreover, a number of other tablets which
belong to members of the same dynasty, but cannot yet be referred to definite kings,
mention Kimash"', Sumurti' and Huhu{nu)ru''' ^ as devastated or invaded by Babylo-
nian armies.* Several of these cities and districts were situated on the east side of
the Tigris and must be sought in Elam and its neighboring countries. We begin now
to understand why the Elamites soon afterwards when they invaded Babylonia made
such a terrible havoc of the temples and cities of theii- enemies ; they simply retaliated
and took revenge for their own former losses and defeats.
4. When the Cassite kings conquered Babylonia, the site of the ancient archive
chamber was long forgotten and buried under a thick layer of debris. Their own store-
room, in which all the votive objects published on Pis. 18-27 and Pis. 60 f., Nos. 133-
142, were discovered, was situated at the edge of a branch of the Shatt-en-Nil outside
of the great S.-E. wall of the temple of Bel.^ The destruction of the archive under
discussion must therefore have taken place between the oveithrow of the second
' PI. 58, No. 127, Obv. 2 ; resp. Obv. 6 ; resp. Obv. 7.
■TI. 58, No. 127, Rev. 4.
' Cf. Scheil, I. c, p. 38. The cily of Marhaihi (in N. Syria, according to Hommel, I. «., p. 9) is mentioaed in coa-
nection with a daughter of IneSin on PI. 55, No. 125, Oljv. 14.
* In view of all these facts above mentioned, Hommel vcill doubtless change his view (that the kings of the second
dynasty of Ur "were apparently confined to this cily, as they did not possess Sumer and also lost Akkad "). That
they were not confined to Ur, but possessed the whole south is proven by their buildings in Eridu (I. B. 3, No. XII, 1, 2)
and in Nijypur (cf. also the statements of the two chronological lists). If Winckler's theory as to tlie seat of the «7»arr««
kibrat irbittivias generally accepted (Hommel apparently does not accept it), the second dynasty of Ur by this very
title would also have claimed N. Babylonia. Whatsoever our position may be as to the meaning of this and other
titles, as a matter of fact, the kings of the second dynasty of Ur possessed the south of Babylonia, and it is impossible
to believe that kings who were the lords of S. Babylonia and conquered parts of Arabia, Syria, Elam and other dis-
tricts between the four natural boundaries defined in Part I, p. 25, note 4, and who doubtless in consequence of their
conquests assumed the proud title "king of the four quarters of the world," should not have been in the possession of
all Babylonia (the case of Gudta is entirely different). The kings of the second dynasty of Ur changed the title of their
predecessors, not becau.«e they had lost Sumer and Akkad, but because they owned more than the old title indicated.
The title of Sumer and Akkad— as I understand its meaning— is practically contained in that of "king of the four
quarters of the world" (Part I, pp. 24 f.), and the kinps of the second dynasty of Ur dropped it therefore for the
same reason as Dungi, when he assumed the title g7iar kibrat arba'tm (Z. A., Ill, p. 94). As to the meanings of the
diff'erent titles, Hommel (whose latest opinion is briefly stated in Aug der bahylonuehen AUertumskunde, p. 8) and I agree
entirely, diflering from Winckler especially in his interpretation of sliar kibrat arba'im and »har nulluShumeri u
Akkadi in the oldest Babylonian insciiptions down to Hammurabi. Notwithstanding that, or rather because I read
and studied \n& AlturienialiHche ForschungenlU, pp. 201-243, and all his previous papers on the same subject sine
ira et studio agaiu and again, I have been unable to convince myself of the correctness of his views.
Tide (Z. A., VII, p. 368), Lehmann (8/iamashahumuhin, pp. 68 ff".), Hommel (i. c.) and I apparently reached similar
conclusions on this important question.
6 Cf. Part I, "Table of Contents," p. <8 (PI. 8, No. 15). Cf. also Peters in The Ammcan. Journal of Archmlogy
X, p. 15.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 33
dynasty of Ur and the beginning of tlie Cassite rule in Babylonia, The history of the
temple of Bel during this period is enveloped in absolute darkness. No single monu-
ment of the members of the so-called first and second Babylonian dynasties has yet
been excavated in NufFar. Apparently our temple did not occupy a very prominent
place during their government. And how could it be otherwise ? Their rule marks
the period of transition from the ancient central cult of Bal in Nippur to the new
rising cult of Marduk in Babylon. Bel had to die that Mardiik might live and take
his place in the religious life of the united country. Even the brief renaissance of the
venerable cult of " the father of the gods " under the Cassite sway did not last very
long. It ceased again as soon as the national uprising under the dynasty of Pashc
led to the overthrow of the foreign invaders, who had extolled the cult of Bel at the
expense of Marduk in Babylon,' and to the restoration of Semitic power and influence
in Babylonia, until under the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon and Ashurbanapal a last
attempt was made to revive the much neglected temple service in the sanctuary of
Nippur.
5. The breaking and scattering of the vases point to a foreign invasion and to a
period of great political disturbance in the country. No Babylonian despot, however
ill-disposed toward an ancient cult, and however unscrupulous in the means taken to
suppress it, would have dared to commit such an outrage against the sacred propeity
of the temple of Bel. In all probability therefore the ancient archive chamber of the
temple was ransacked and destroyed at the time of the Elamitic invasion (c. 2285 B.C.),
when Kudur-Nankhundiand his hordes laid hands on the temples of Shumer and Akkad.
That which in the eyes of these national enemies of Babylonia appeared most valu-
able among its contents was carried to Susa' and other places ; what did not find favor
with them was smashed and scattered on the temple court adjoining the storehoase.
From the remotest time until then apparently most gifts had been scrupulously pre-
served and handed down from generation to generation. Only those movable objects
which broke accidentally in the regular service, or which purposely were buried in con-
nection with religious rites, may be looked for in the lowest strata of Ekur.
AGE OF THE INSCRIBED MONUMENTS
Having explained why the most ancient documents so far excavated in Nuffar were
found in pieces above the platform of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat, I now proceed to determine
the general age of these antiquities and their relation to the inscriptions of Sargon I.
' Cf. Part I, pp. 30 f.
'Cf. Parti, p. 31.
34 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
The inscriptions Xos. 86-112 have many palocographic features in common and doubt-
less belong to the same general period, the precise extent of which cannot be given.
Two groups, however, may be clearly distinguished within it, diffeiing from each other
principally in the forms used for mu (Briinnow, List 1222) and dam {Hid., 11105).
Instead of the two familiar Old Babylonian characters, in mu the two pairs of parallel
lines found at or near the middle of the horizontal line, sometimes cross each other
(Nos. 92, 5 ; 98, 3 ; 99, 4 ; 101, 3, etc.), while dam occasionally has a curved or straight
line between the two elements of which it is composed (No. Ill, 3 and 6 ; Ko. 98, 2
and 5 ; cf. No. 94, 3).^ This peculiar form of davi has so far not been met with outside
of a very limited number of inscriptions fiom Nippur; that of mu occurs also on the
barrel cylinder of Urukagina," although in a more developed stage. Whenever one
of these characters has its peculiar fcn'm in an inscription of Nippur, the other, if
accidentally occurring in the same inscription, also has its peculiar form as described
above (cf. No. 94, 3 and 4 ; No. 98, 2 (5) and 3 ; No. Ill, 3 and G). The two char-
acters represent therefore the same peiiod in the history of cuneiform writing, to the
end of which the cylindei* of Urukagina also belongs. This period has not yet been
definitely fixed. As various historical considerations seemed unfavorable to placing this
ruler after the other kings of Shirpurla, Jensen provisionally placed him befoie them;^
Heuzey was less positive ; * HommeP and "Winckler" regarded him as later, while Mas-
jjcro, without hesitation, but without giving any reasons, made him " the first in date
of the kings of Lagash." ' Aside from the reasons given by Jensen, and a few simi-
lar arguments which could be brought forth in favor of his theory, the following pakc-
ographic evidence proves the chronological arrangement of Jensen and Maspero to le
correct :
1. The peculiar form of mu occurs in inscriptions from Nippur which, if deter-
' This bliort lice, about the tignificance of which I refer to my grealer woik, Getchichte und Syntem der KeiUchrijt,
was oiiginally curved, became then straight and was later placed at tlie eud of the character (No. 93, 6 ; 96, 4 ; 113,
12), finally developing into a full sized wedge (De Sarzeo, Leeoutertes en Chaldee, PI. 26. No. 1, col. 11, 1 ; Heuzey
in Rtme d' Anyrioloyie II, p. 79, No. 1, 13 [a duplicate of this inscriplion is in M. I. O , Couslanlinople], and the
present work. No. 123, Obvtrs^e, 1). Sometimes this line is entirely omitted (No. ITi, 6).
' De Sarztc, I. c, PI. 32, col. I, 7 ; col. II, 1,4, 12 ; col. Ill, 3, 7. The foim of mu. is more developed in Uruka-
gina's inscription, indicating that the latter is somewhat later than the corresponding Kippur texts. On the other
moDuments of Urukagina the regular Old Babylonian form is used exclusively.
"In Schradcr's Keilintehriflliche Bibliotluk, Vol. Ill, Part 1, p. 8.
* Formerly he regarded him as decidedly later than tire other kings of Lagat.h (in De Satzec, Lecomertes en Chal-
dee. pp. 110, 112). More recently he espressed himself as doubtful : " II en resulte que le roi Ourouka-ghina doit
Sire tenu, soit pour appartenir k une dynastie ant^iieure a celle du roi Our-Nina, scit pour avoir, apies rapparition
des premiers pal^si, relevig le titre royal a Sirpourla " (BeDut d' Auyrioloyie II, p. 84).
* Geschichie Babylohiens und Astyrieni, pp. 290f.
' Oeichichte Babyloniem und Atn^yriens, p. 41.
' 2he Dawn of Civilization, p. 604.
CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUK. 35
mined by the character of dam alone, must be classified as older than the royal in-
scriptions of Tello.
2. The form of mu employed in Urnkagina's cylinder does not occur in any other
inscription of Tello. The cylinders are therefore to be regarded as older than the
other monuments, if it can be shown that this peculiar form of ma represents a more
ancient stage of writing^ and did not originate from an accidental prolongation of
certain lines in mu by a cai-eless scribe.^
3. The very pronounced forms cut in stone vases (as, e. g., found in ^NTo. 98, 3 ;
101, 4 ; 92, 5, and first of all in No. Hi, 4) force us to eliminate the element of acci-
dent. But, besides, it can be proved by an analysis of the character mu itself that the
regular Old Babylonian sign is only a later historical development of a more ancient
form. The correct interpretation of the original picture will, at the same time, enable
us to catch an interesting glimpse of certain prehistoric conditions in ancient Shumer.
According to Houghton,'' a close relation exists between the character for viu and hii
(Briinnow, I. c, 2044) and the first part of the character for nam {ibid., 2087). I trust
no Assyriologist of recent date has ever taken this attempt at solving a palseogi'aphic
problem very seriously. The sign for nam has no connection with the other two char-
acters and is no compound ideogram, but, in its original form, represents a flying bird
with a long neck.* Since in Babylonia, as in other countries of the ancient woi'ld, the
future was foretold by observing the flight of birds, this pictui-e became the regular
ideogram for " fate, destiny " {skhnlu) in Assyrian. The original picture for mu, on
the other hand, is no bird, but an arrow whose head foi-merly pointed downward, and
whose cane shaft bears the same primitive marks or symbols of crossed lines as are
characteristic of the most ancient form of arrow used in the religious ceremonies of
the N^oith American Indians.' As the shaft was represented by a single line in Baby-
' This argument is conclusive, as the theory, according to wliich later writers occisionally imitate older forms of
cuneiform (or linear) characters, in the sense generally understood by Assyriologists, is without any foundation and
against all the known facts of Babylonian palreography. Cf. my remarks in Part I, pp. 12f.
' Jensen's hesitation, so far as founded upon the form of the cliaracler ka, can be aUandoned, as the form of this
charactet is surely far older than Gudea.
' In the Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archceology VI, pp. 404f.
*This (act becomes evident from a study of the oldest forms in the inscriptions of Tello and Nippur. The original
picture is still found on the most ancient Babylonian document in existence, unfortunately scarcely known among
Assyriologists. It is (or was) in the possession of Dr. A. Blau and was published by Dr. W. Hayes Ward in the
Proceedings of the American Oriental Society, October, 1885. The bird represented is therefore no "swallow" (Hom-
mel, Sumerisc?ie Letestucke, p. 6, No. 67), but a large bird with a long neck, such as a goose or a similar water bird
found on the Babylonian swamps. Later our picture wfvs also used as the ideogram for " swallow," designating her
as the Hying bird par excellence, as the bird nearly always in motion vvlieu seen at day time.
»As I learned through the courtesy of Mr. Frank Hamilton Gushing of the Bureau of American Ethnology in
the Smithsonian Institution at Washington. After a correspondence on this subject it became evident that we had
36 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
Ionian writing, the original mark carved upon its surface had to be drawn across it.
Instead of > "^ ^^ ^,'we find, therefore, -^^^,from which, by short-
ening the crossed lines, the regular form — ^ — ^ developed at a later time. The
correctness of this explanation is assured by the otherwise inexplicable absence of an
ideogram for ussu, " arrow," in Assyrian. For it is impossible to conceive that a people
using the bow in their system of writing should have altogether excluded the arrow,
which played such a conspicuous roh in the daily life and religious ceremonies of
ancient nations in general. But how is it to be explained that our ideogram does not
mean "arrow " at all, but signifies " name? " Just as the picture of a flying bird in
writing proper was used exclusively with reference to its religious significance, in order
to express the abstract idea of " fate, destiny," so the arrow with the marks or symbols
of ownership (originally two crossing lines') carved on the shaft became the regular
ideogram for " personality " or " name." The same association of ideas led to exactly
the same symbolism and usage among the North American Indians, with whom '' the
arrow " is the symbol of personality." It becomes now very evident that the Babylo-
nian seal-cylinder, with its peculiar shape and use, has developed out of the hollow'
shaft, of an arrow marked with symbols and figures, and is but a continuation and
elaboration in a more artistic form of an ancient primitive idea.
From palscographic and other considei'ations it is therefore certain that Urukagina
lived before the ancient kings of Shirpuria, while the inscriptions published in the
present work as JSTos. 90, 91, 92, 94, 98, 99, 101, 111 are still older than Urukagina.
The interval between him and the following rulers of Tello who style themselves
" kings " cannot have been very great, however. They all show so many pakcographic
features in common that they must be classified as an inseparable group. To the
both reached llie same conclusions as to the oldest form and significance of the arrow in picture wriling by pursuing
entirely different lines of research. My arguments, corroborated by Mr. Cushing's own investigations and long resi-
dence among tribes which still practice many of the ancient primitive rites and customs, become therefore conclusive
in regard to the original form of the character mu. I quote from Mr. Cushing's letter the interesting fact that the
above-drawn arrow with two pairs of crossing lines on its shaft is called by the Zuni a'thlua "speeder (commander)
of all " (namely, of all the other arrows used in their religious ceremonies). A treatise on the ceremonial use of the
arrow among the Indians, by Mr. Gushing, is in press.
' Still used with the same significance in Europe and America by persons who cannot write, if they have to aflSx
their names to legal documents. The crossed lines on the Indian arrows have a deep religious significance, according
to Gushing.
' Cf. on this whole subject Gulin, Korean Games, pp. XXIf. To Prof. Dr. Brinton and Mr. Stuart Culin I am
indebted for recent information on this subject.
' Because made of bulrushes, growing abundantly along the marshes and canals of lower Babylonia.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 37
same age doubtless belong most, if not all. of the other inscriptions published on Pis.
3(3-47 (No. 112). I shall prove my theory in detail by the following arguments :
I. Palseographically they exhibit most important points of contact with Uruka-
gina, Ur-Nina, Edingiranagin, Enanatuma I, Entemena, Enanatuma II, especially
with the first three mentioned.
a. Characteristic signs are identical in these Nippur and Tello inscriptions. Cf ,
e. g., gish, No. 87, col. I, 10, col. II, 37, No. 110, 4 f. e., with the same sign in the
texts of Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin ;^ ban, No. 87, col. I, 10, col. II, 37 (cf No.
102, 2) with the same sign in the te.xts of Edingiranagin ; a, No. 86, 8 ( Var.), 1 f. e..
No. 87, passim ; No. 96, 2; No. 104, 3; 106, 4 ; 110, 8 f e., 112, 7, with the sign
used by Ur-Nina, Edingiranagin, Enanatuma I, Entemena (cf also the present work,
No. 115, col. J, 7, col. ]1, 1, 2, etc.) ; shu, No. 87, col. Ill, 34 (and Var ) with Ura-
kagina, Edingiranagin ; da, No. 86, 7, No. 87, col. I, 19, col. II, 18, 20, 29, etc., with
the sign used by Ur-Nina, Edingiranagin, Entemena; a (ID), No. 87, col. II, 41
(Yar.) with Entemena (No. 115, col. I, 5) ; ta, No. 87, col. I, 46, col. II, 4, 12, with
the same sign used by Urukagina, Ur-Nina, Edingiranagin, Entemena; ma, No. 88,
col. Ill, 2, with the same sign used by Urukagina, Endigiranagin ;' ma, No. 87, col.
II, 40 ff, with the same sign used by Urukagina, Edingiranagin ; and many other
characters.
6. The script is almost entirely linear like that of Urukagina,' Ur-Nina and
Edinjjiranaofin.
c. They show certain peculiarities in the script, which so far have been observed
only in the most ancient texts of Tello: (1) Lines of linear signs running parallel
to a separating line (marking columns and other divisions) frequently fall together
with this latter so that the character now appears attached to the separating line
above, below, to the right or left. Sometimes characters ai'e thus attached to two sep-
arating lines at the same time. Cf No. 87, col. I, 5 (ma), 12 (to), col. II, 9 (shu), 17
(l(i), 29 (li), col. Ill, 36 (w), No. lOG, 2 (nin), and many others written on different
fragments of No. 87.^ (2) In accordance with this principle two or more chai-acters
'In these quotations, as a rule, I shall abstain from giving the exact passages, as I expect that everybody who ,
examines my arguments has made himself familiar with the palaeography and contents of the most ancient inscriptions
of Tello before, and to those who have not done so, I do not intend to give introductory lessons in the limited number
of pages here at my disposal, in fact for those I do not write.
'Also used by Naram-Sin, cf. No. 120, col. II, 4.
'Except of course his barrel cylinder, which has cuneiform characters, as it was inscribed with a stylus.
*For this palaeographic peculiarity in the inscriptions of Telio, cf. Urukagina (De Saizec, Vicouvertes, PI. 32,
col. II, 9, 10, col. HI. 2, 5. col. IV, 3, 9, col. V, 2, 4) ; Ur-Nina (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2, No. 2, col. I, 1, 3, Uecue d'As-
tyriologie 11, p. 84, 3 and 4 ; p. 147, col. I, 3, 5, col. Ill, 3,'f), col. IV, 3, 5); Edingiranagrin (De Sarzec, I c , PI. 4,
Frag. A, col. I, 6, col. II, 3, 4, 5, 10, etc.; PI. 31, No. 2, col. I, 1^, 6, col. II, 1-3, 5, etC:); Enanatuma I {Rtvue
38 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
standing in close proximity to each other frequently enter into a combination, forming
so-called ligatures.^ Cf. !N'o. 8(i, 5 Var. (ma-ua), 8 {tab-ba, cf also Variants), 15
Yar. (hi-guh) ; Part I, Pi. 14, 2 (du-dtt) ; No. 87, col. IE, 9 (nia-shu), 20 Var. (da-
g<l), 34 (ki-ag), 45 (da-gi, cf. Var. gi-gi),' col. Ill, 21 (ba-dag),' 34 (PA [first half
of the character sib] '-gal) ; No. 93, 7 ( Shul-pa) ;' No. 9 1, 1 (Mn-dM-dug (?) ) f No. 98,
2 {dam-dumu) ', No. Hi, G {nada).' On the monuments of Tello this tendency to
unite two characters into one is almost entirely confined to the inscriptions of Ur-
Nina.* The best illustration is afforded by the writing of the name of his son, Nina-
shu-banda. The four signs which compose the name are contracted into one large
sign, the earliest example of a regular monogram in the history of writing (De Sar-
zec, I. c, PL 2 '''", No. 1). A number of signs which occurred always'' in the same
d'Assyriologie III, p. 31, 1-5, 9, 11, 14 f.); Entemena (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 5, Nos. 2, 4 and 5; PI. 31, No. 3, col. I,
2, 4, 5, col. II, 3 ff ; lievue d' Assyriologie II, p. 148, col I, 1-6, etc.) ; Uuanatiinia II (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 6, No.
4, 2-5, 7 f.) For other examples of Entemena's text in the preseat work, cf. Nos. 115-117. Appirijnlly Dr. .Jastrow
Lad not seen a Tello inscription when he wrote his remark in Z. A. VIII, p. 217.
'In a limited measure the same peculiarity occurs in several Assyrian inscriptions, c. 3000 years later. Cf , e. g.,
ina, in the inscription of Tiglathpileser I (I R., 9 flf), ina pa, Salm. Obel., 1. 180, 176 (Hilprechf, Astyriaca, p. 27,
note), etc.
^Col. II, 43. Ki nin Unuyki ga, 4i. ganam-yad-shakir-a dim, 45. »hig mu-da-gC-gi. The last character in 1. 38,
which remained unidentified for such a long time (cf. Amiaud et Muchineau, Tableau Compare, No. 122, Jensen in
Schrader's K B. Ill, part 1, p. 16, note 4 ; Scheil in tiecueil XV, p. 63 ; Elommel, Samerisehe Lenstucke, p. 3J, No.
376) is Identical with Biiinnow, Lut 5410. It has in the ancient inscriptions tlie two values ga and ma (for the latter
cf , «. g.. No. 87, col. II, 19 {kalamma), 29 ( Urumtt ma) ). On PI. 50, col. II, 4, read NA-GA = iskkan (and col. Ill,
4 f., KI-GAL (= kigalla) iahpu-uk, against Scheil in Ricueil XV, 62 f.).
•Col. Ill, 19. nam-ti-mu, 20. nam ti, 21. ga-ba-dag-yi — "unto my life he may add life."
*PAgal LV sag gud, read sib {I'A-LU sag-gudagal, "the shepherd having the head of an ox" — "the ox-
headed shepherd," a synonym of king, according to Jensen.
*0n the god Shulpa-ud du, cf. Jensen, Kosmologie, pp 126 f., and in Schrader's K. B., Ill, part I, p. 65, note 11
(Umunpauddu). Oppert read Uun-pa-e.
""The goddess who destroys life," an ideogram of Bau or Gula (Bruanow, List 11084, cf. Ill R., 41, col. II,
29-31 ; III R, 43, col. IV, 15-18, and the present work, PI. 67, col. Ill, 1-5). The same deity is mentioned No. 95, 1,
No. 1C6, 1, No. Ill, 1. On the value of dug cf. Ilommel, Sumeritdie Leseatiicke, p. 5, No. 55, and p 12, No. 115.
' Cf. No. 99. 5.
'Cf. Revve d'Astyriologie II, p. 147, col. Ill, C and 7, col. V, 1, 3, 6.
•Cf. No. 87, col. I, 5, 40, 42, etc. The linear sign is composed of e (canal) -f gi (reed) and originally denotes a
piece of land intersected by canals and covered with reeds (cf. No. 87. col. Ill, 29). The land par excellence with
these two characteristic features was to the Babylonians thl-ir own country, which therefore was called by the oldest
inhabitants Ki + e -\- gi = Kengi, "the land of canals and reeds." From tliis correct etymology of Kengi and its use
in the earliest le.xts (b<ir bar Kengi, No. 87, col. II, 21, and Ensh'ig>agnna en Kengi, No. 90, 3) it follows that the name
does not signify " low-lands " or " Tiefebene " in general in tlie ancient inscriptions, which alone have to decide its
mtaning (against Winckler in Milleilungen des Akademiack- Orientaliatischen Vertias zu Berlin, 1887, p. 12), but that It
is the geographical designation of a well-deflned district. Babylonia proper. As, however. Babylonia and low-
lands arc equivalent ideas, Kengi could also be used in a wider sense for "low-lands " (/na<u) in general.
CHIEFLT FROM NIPPCTli. 39
combination and served to express but one idea or object, were regularly contracted
at this early time and became compound ideograms, e. g., Jcalama " country," gishdin^
" wine," etc. (3) Lines of linear signs which run parallel to a separating line are
often omitted, even if the sign is not directly connected with this latter. Cf. No.
'Tlie peciiliiir way in which it is written in the oldest inscriptions of Tello, leaves no doubt as to its coraposition
(guh -\- dill). The analysis of this ideogram by Pinches (Sign lAst, No. 76 a =: kash -f din), accepted by Delitzsch
(Asuytisc/us Ilmidirditerbtich, p. -854), Jensen (in Schrader's K. B. Ill, pait 1, p. 27, note G), Ilonimel (Sumeriaeke
Lese^tvcke, No ]80) and others, must therefore be abandoned. For examples cf. Edingiranagin's inscription un-
earthed in London (I'roc. Sec. Bibl Arch.,'Sov. 1893), col. IV, 3, 7,col.V, 3: 5rts//dj» zm-zv-a; or Gudea D (DeSarzee,
I.e., PI. 9): 6. Mn gan^ ^ 7. 3Ieluy-ya'^l, 8. Ou-lV^, 9. kur Nitag^i, 10. gu gi.ih mu na gal la-aan, 11. maO^^i-v-a
gisfidin (tie !), 13. i^hirpur-la'-'i-shu, 13. muna-tum — " Magan, Meluha. Gubl, Dilmun, eacli (««) of which possesses
every kind of tree, brought a ship (laden) with timber and wine to Shirpurla." Jensen's question (in Schrader's^.
B. Ill, part 1, p. 13, note 12), as to what Amiaud may have read in Ur-Nina's inscription (De Sarzcc, I. c, PI. 2, No.
1, col IV, 1-3, which Jensen left untranslated) is answered by leferring him to tlie Gudea pa'sage just translated,
and to Mfvue d' Asityrioloyie II, p. 147, col. V, 3-6, together with De Sarzec, i c , PI. 2bis, No. 1 (lower section, charac-
ters standing immediately before the king). Amiaud, however (in Berordii of the Past- I, p. 6.5 j, as well as Oppert (in
JitTued' Asuyriologie 11, p. HI) and Heuzvy (in Retae d' Asuyrinlogie III, p. 16, and Decouotrtes en ChuUlee, p. \10)
■wrongly read gith din (notwithstanding the passage from Gudea just quoted, lines 6 and 10, where the two respective
characters aie very different from each other !) as gan (kan) finding the name of Magan in the first line. The passage
reads rather : 1. ma g'llidin, 2. kura-ta, 3. gu gish gal, 4. mu-tum (?) — "a ship (laden) with wine he brought from the
country which ixissesses every kind of tree." We are now enabled to understand the full significance of Ur-Nina'a
perforated has relief (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2t'is) which remained obscure to Heuzey in his treatise mentioned below.
These bas-reliefs and incised slabs (cf. the present work, I'l. XVI, Nos. 37 f.) did not serve "a maintenir dresses sur
des aulels ou sur des massifs de briques, divers engins consaci6< aux dieux et particjlierement des masses d'armes
votives" (Heuzey, LesArmoiiies Ckaldeennes de Sirpourla, pp. 11 f., cf pp. 6f.). For they would have been too small
and M eak for such a puipose. The true facts are rather these : (1) They accompanied donations of any kind made to
tlie temple. But while such donations were consumed in the interest of the temple service (cf. IlilprechI, Z. A. VIII,
p. 191 f.) or defayed in time (buildings) or died (slaves), etc., these tablets were preserved in the temple as lasting
memorials to their munificent donors and served at the same time to induce other worshipers to similar acts of piety.
(2) The bole in the middle of the tablets served to fasten it, by the aid of a nail, in the wall or floor of the temple,
possibly on the altar itself. (3) The scenes, objects and inscriptions on these tablets generally illustrate and describe
tlie person and work of the donor in relation to his deity. Ur Nina's more elaborate votive tablets (of which the
bmaller is only an excerpt, cf. De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2bis, pp. 168-173), accordingly represent two sides of tlie king's
work undertaken in the service of his god. In the upper section he bus the dvpshig (:= dup»hikhu), l\te symbol of
masons, upon his head (exactly as Nabopolai-ser describes hiuisilf in the present work, PI. 33, col. II, 57 ft".), and is
surrounded by his children and page {Ua-nita "at his side "= " page," not "in his hand," — Oppert in Rtvue d' Attyr-
iologie III, p. 16, note 1). This picture illustrates the accompanying statement : " Ur-Nina, king of Shirpurla, son of
Nigalnigin, built the temple of Ningirsu, built the abzu banda (cf. Jensen in K. B. Ill, part 1, p. 13, note ft), buiitthe
temple of Nina." In the lower section the same king, seated and surrounded by his children and his chief butler
{Sag antug ' he is the chief"), offers a libation of wine. This picture illustrates the words standing below the cup, "a
ebipof wine he brought from the country which possessesevery kind of tree." Theinscriptionof the bas-relief published
by Heuzey in Lei Armoiries Clialdirnnes de SirpouiiareaCf : 1. Log (DVDV = abala "to bring," nazazu. "to set up"),
2. «an^a (Briinnow, Z,!«<5980) ma^, 3. ding:r j^ingir su-ka, ^. dimjir Ningir-»tt, 5. E-ninuitra, 6. lag, 7. aang'i (cf.
the present work. No. 87, col. I, 30, and No. 113 ,3) diimr Nin gir-su-ka ge, 8 ki ta, 9. mu-na-tauddu, 10. GAG
4- GISH (not giial, Hommel, Sum. Leaest , No. 205) uraiJia, 11. munagim—" Gift of the high priest of Ningirsu to
Ningirsu of the temple EninLQ. The gift of the priest of Ningirsu he brought from .... and worked it into a . . . ."
40 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
8G, 3 Yar. (ra), 4 Yar. (U), 5 Yar. (na) ; No. 87, col. I, 4 (Unug), 14 and 20 Yar.
(dingir), 19 Yar., col. ]I, 37 Yar., 45, JII, 34 Yar. (da), 40 Yar. (kalama) ; col. J I,
31 Yar. {gim) ; col. Ill, 2 {urn), 23, 41 Yar. (a), 29 {ma), 37 Yar. (ria»0> etc. Out-
side of the Nippur texts this peculiarity is almost confined^ to the inscriptions of Ur-
Nina. Cf., e. g., De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2 '"', No. 2, upper section (da in the name of Ah-
da), ibid. ( Ur in the name of Ur-Nina), lievu? d' Assyriologie II, p. 147, col. Y, 4.
II. The pateographic evidence brought forth is conclusive. Nos, 86, 87 and the
other texts referred to above, show all the characteristic features of the inscriptions of
Urukagina, Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin. But besides they exhibit a number of palaeo-
graphic peculiarities -which are altogether absent from the inscriptions of Tello, and
must be regarded as eharacteiistic features of an earlier stage of writing. They will
be treated in full at another place.- I confine myself here to a brief statement of the
following fact. A number of signs have a form representing almost the original pic-
ture, others have at least a more original form than the insei'iptions from Tello, even
those of Urukagina not excepted. Cf. sum (No. 87, col. I, 17, the ear of a corn, ef
also 1. 45), gi (Hid., col. I, 3, a reed, bulrush)', a {ibid, col. I, 31 in egi-a, a tattooed
forearm with hand),* bar {ibid., col. II, 21 ; No. 98, 4 (the skin of an animal or) a
coarse rug),'^ lah {ibid., col. 1, 21, water poured out, therefore, "to wash")," ra {ibid.,
'Que example is touiid in a text of Entemena (ne, cf. Mevve d' Assyriologie II, p. 149, col. IV, 2). Tlie way in
which Ur is written in the name of Uiuliagina (De Sarztc, I. c, PI. 3i, col. 1, 1), furnishes the key to the origin of this
peculiariiy. For details on this subject I refer to my Gesehichte und System der Keilschrift, which has been in prepa-
ration for tlie last nine years.
' In advance I warn Assyriologists not to regard a fourth palaiographic peculiariiy (so far confined to these Nippur
texts) as a mistake of the scribes : (4) If two linear signs which are lo be connected grammatically stand close
together in writing, jet wiihout touching each other, frequently one line ol the second running parallel to a line in
the first is omitted entirely and has to be supplemented from the first sign. Cf. No. 87, col. Ill, 37 : la-ni (,sic.'), 39 :
ogaui (sic!), 40 V»r. : muiia, (Uc!) ; No. 103, 3 : md-ua (sic!).
"In order to obtain a clear conception of the original picture, this sign must not be turned to the left (as Hough-
ton, I. c, p. 473, and others did). For it is a law in cuneiform writing "that the characters are all and always
reversed in the same way ; what (originally) was the right hand side became (later) the top" (Berlin, I. c, p. 6).
The triangle on the lelt of our picture does not represent the lower end of the stem of a reed, but rather its top
or cob. Ct. the corresponding pictures on the Assyiian monuments published in Layard, The Monuments of Mneceh,
Second Scries, e. g., PI. 12, No. 1 (reproduced by Alaspero in the Dawn of Vimlization, p. 5C1).
*The crossed lines do not represent "an ornamented sleeve" (Bertin, I. c, p. 9), but marks of tattooing (cf.
Berger, "Rapport sur les tatouages Tunisiens," in lietue d' Assyriologie III, pp. 33-41). The cuneiform sign wiihout
these maiks means 'side" (da) ; with them, it denotes him who is at somebody's side for assistance ; he who has
the same marks of tattooing upon his arm, therefore has become his "brother." The sign for shesh, "brother,"
denotes a person as the second child of the same lamily, while the former expresses tiibal relations represented by a
common symbol.
'According to Opperl {Expedition en i/esopotarnie. Tome II, p. 64) and Bertin (I. e., p. 8) an altar. Impossible I
It represents the skin of an anin al or belter a coarse rug f^pread upon the ground for persons of rank (and images
of deities) to sil upon ; in other words, it denotes the place of honor, in exact harmony with the custom prevailing
in the tents of Arabia and Mesopotamia to day. Lehmann (Shamathshumtil'in, p. 122) is therefore correct in giving
CHIEFLY FEOM NIPPUR. 41
col. I, 37 Var., col. Ill, IS'Var., "canal" + "to fill" (s^ = horn), i. e., "to irri-
gate"),^ lugal {ibid., col. I, 1-3, the sign shows the remnant of the original arm.* Cf.
also the ideogram zng (ihid., col. I, 3, 38, etc.), gur (ibid., col. Ill, 42 Var.),^ Kish
(No. 92, 3; :N'o 102, 3; 103, 4),^ ag (No. 83, 11 and 14),^ and many others for whose
explanation I must refer to my OescTiiclite und System der Keilsch^iftf' All the stone
inscriptions of Urukagina have the regular Old Babylonian sign for mw,^ just as the
Nippur texts here treated. On the other hand, the Nippur texts have a large number
of far more original forms of signs than the Urukagina and Ur-Nina inscriptions
published.* In view of these facts I can only draw one conclusion — that most of these
Nippur texts are older than those of Urukagina.
III. Another important fact corroborates my determination of the age of these
tolMra(g) the original meaning, "seat," instead of "cliamber." Tliis sign occurs frequently in the contracts of
Nuflfar (in a much more developed form) and was identified with bar by Scheil independently of me. Cf. Reeueil
XVII, p. 40d.
' 8iik(k)aUu denotes the servant (,gal) who pours out (su) [namely water over his master's hands and feet]. A
word with similar meaning (zu) is apparently contained in zu-ab, "ocean," which Hommel translated half correctly
"house of water (?)," cf. Sameritche Leseatucke, No. 6. Origin illy zu and su had the same idaogram, which repre-
sents a vessel (cistern?) into which water flows. Zu means, therefore, " to flow into," or trans., "to pour into, to
add," then flgur., " to increase one's linowledge, to learn, to know." Za-ab denotes "the house (abode) into which
all the waters flow." Sukkalla may be translated "chamberlain" (Kammerer), later it received a more general
meaning.
' Oppert already recognized the general significance of the picture (I. c, p. 64). But the exact analysis of the
compound ideogram, which I discovered long before we excavated in Nuffar, remained obscure to him, Houghton,
Sayce {Transaelions of 8oc. Bibl. Arch. VI, p. 47'5) and others. Cf. a very curious form, which is but a mutilated
"ra," in col. I, 37, second Var.
» The two elements lu + gal appuar separated in No. 83, 2 Var., 13 Var. ; No. 101, 7 ; No. 105, 7.
' Successfully analyzed by Ball in Proc. 8oc. Bibl. Arch. XV, p. 49. The line which continues beyond the head
is, however, no continuation of the forearm, but represents the cushion between the head and the vessel upon which
the latter rests. Originally the arm reached further to the rim of the vessel, as in the corresponding Egyptian hiero-
glyphics and as illustrated by PI. XVI, No. 37, of the present work.
'It closely approaches the original picture explained by a Babylonian scribe on the famouj fr. from Kuyunjik,
col II r, 6 (.Tram. Soc. Bibl. Areh. VI, p. 455).
'Cf. also the same sign on the very ancient monument preceding Urukagina's time (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. Ibis b.,
col. IV, 1).
•As I have to dispose of more urgent matters at present, some year's may still pass before its publication.
'Only his barrel cylinder in clay exhibits traces of the older form for mu, as shown above.
' Nobody can object that a few cliaracters in these Nippur inscriptions seem to show the beginning of wedge-
writing and lliat a few others seem to liave a later form. Lugalziggisi presented c. 103 large inscribed vases, all
apparently bearing the same long inscription here published, to Inlil of Nippur. Every stonecutter available was
employed. Several of them understood but little of writing, and consequently some very ridiculous forms were
produced. Cf., «. g., col. H, 16 (second variant), dug-a (sic!), 29 (second variant) da, 89 (variants) aga, 43 gur,
44 (fourth variant) ganam, 43 ahig, and others. In order to understand the enormous difiiculties which I had to over-
come in restoring this text, Assyriologists will bear this fact in mind.
42 • OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
inscriptions very strongly. In the inscriptions of Edingiranagin, or Edingiranatum/
the grandson of Ur-Nina, a city, generally transliterated as Is-ban}', plays a very
important role. In fact the annihilation of the power of this city in S. Babylonia is the
one prominent feature which characterizes his government, and to which (in connection
with Ercch, Ur and some other cities) the king refers again and again.^ The most
interesting object yet found in Tello, the so-called stele of vultures, was doubtless set
up by this sovereign in commemoration of his great victory over ^'"BAK*"'.^ How-
ever this may be, so much is certain that at some time previous to Edingiranagin, a
foreign power whose centre was ''"''BAN", had succeeded in invading and conquering
a large portion, if not the whole, of Babylonia, Erech and Ur included. The same
city of '"''BAN*" is also mentioned in the long Nippur text No. 87, and here again it
occurs in connection with Erech and Ur (and Larsam). We learn at the same time
from this very important historical document that Lugalzaggisi, son of a certain Ukush
"patesi of "'^'BAN*'"' (col. I, 3,9, 10) had conquered all Babylonia and established
an empire extending from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea, in size there-
fore not inferior to that founded much later by Sargon I. This first " king of the
world" (lugat^alama, col. I, 4, 36-11, col. Ill, 4) of whom Babylonian documents
give us information, selected Ercch as his capital, and by his great achievements raised
^''BAN'', his native city, "to great power" {a mag mu-um-gnr, col. II, 41f). The
two documents, Nippur, No. 87, and the stele of vultures from Tello, belong closely
together and supplement each other, the one giving a resume of the rise and height of
the power and influence of ^*''BAN*', the other illustrating its downfall. The former
must therefore antedate the monument of Edingiranagin. As doubtless some time
elapsed between the rise and downfall of this foreign power ; as, moreover, Shirpurla
is not mentioned in Lugalzaggisi's inscription, apparently because it did not as yet
exercise any political influence ; '^ and finally as palseographically this inscription from
Nippur shows more traces of oi-iginality than the texts of Urukagina and Ur-Nina, as
'In ^ie.w of De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 31, No. 3, col. Ill, 5 (^Edingira-na-tum-md ^ " Brought into llie house of his
god " (by his parents after his birth).
»Cf. De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 8, Fragm. A, col. I, 5, 8, col. II, 4, 13, col. Ill, 5 ; PI. 4, Fragm. A, col. II, 3, 11 :
Fragm. B, col. Ill, 3, col. V, 4 ; PI. 31, No. 3, col. I, 6.
'For details cf. lleuzey's explanation of the figurative representations in his work, i«s Origines Orientates.
pp. 49-84, and in De Sarzec, I. c, pp. 174-184. I agree with this scholar that the people whose defeat is illustrated on
this monument belong to the city (and country) of .9'8'»BA.N'-"« (De Sarzec, I. c, pp. 18i).
♦This was the original reading of 1. 10 ; the traces preserved on two fragments establish my text restoration of
this line beyond doubt.
'The fragment of an inscribed object, apparently dedicated by a king of S's/'BAN'--' to Ningirsu, was found in
Tello (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 5, No. 3, and p. 119). From the character used for " king " I draw the conclusion (with
Hcuzey) that the object belongs to a somewhat later period. Apparently s'sABAN*' played a second important idle in
the Babylonian history.
CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUR. 43
stated above, we are justified in placing Lugalzaggisi before these two rulers of Shir-
purla and in regarding most of the inscriptions published as I^os. 86-112 as older than
the earliest royal inscriptions fi'om Tello/ At any rate, they are not later than these.
A question of fundamental importance for our correct conception of the earliest
phase of Babylonian history has been repeatedly discussed within the last ten years : In
which relation did Sargon I (and Narum-Sin) stand to the early kings of Tello? Did
he antedate or succeed them ? Winckler' and Maspero ' expressed themselves decidedly
in favor of the former view,'' while Hommel,^ Heuzey ° and myself (Part I, p. 19),' with
more or less emphasis placed Sargon I and his son after Ur-Kina and Edingiranagin
I will now briefly give the definite proof of the validity of our theory.
1. The results of the exploration of the lowest strata of Ekur will have convinced,
us that Babylonian civilization had a history antedating the kingdom of Sargon I by
several thousand years. This pre-Sargonic period must have had a system of writing;
for the earliest texts at our disposal, however closely approaching the original picture in
a number of cases, presuppose an earlier stage of writing, such as is testified to have
existed in Babylonia by the monument " Blau " ' and by the famous fragments from
Kuyunjik.'-' Pieces of inscribed objects unearthed below the Sargon level prove posi-
tively that writing existed in N^ippur long before Sargon I. It seems, therefore, at the
very outset, impossible to believe that not one document antedating the highly devel-
oped style of writing in Sargon's monuments should have been excavated in liTuffar
or Tello. In fact, it would be altogether unreasonable to regard the inscriptions of
Sargon and Naram-Sin as the first written records of the ancient Babylonian civili-
zation.
2. Everybody who has studied the earliest inscriptions of Babylonia from their
originals, and has devoted that special pains to all the details of palaeography, which
'The litlle fragment No. 107 cannot be referred to the time of Entemena, the only other ruler of Tello who,
according to our present knowledge, presented an inscribed vase to Inlil. Perhaps it is the first indication of
the rising of Shirpurla in the Soulh and of the extending of its sphere of influence northward at the expense of
ffi«ABANW.
' Uatenuchungen, p. 43 ; OeschicMe, pp. 40f. (but cf on the other side p. 42 I) ; AUorientaliiche Forschungen III,
pp. 23Gfr.
' In Uecueil XV, pp. 65f. ; The Dawn of CMUzathn, p. 603, note 3 (end).
♦Recently adopted by Rogers, Outlines of the IJistory of Early Babylonia, Leipzig, 1S9>, p. 11, note 1 [but given
up again after hearing my address, Contributions to the History of Sargon land His Predecessors, before the Oriental
Club of Philadelphia].
' Ziittchrift fur Keilschriftforschang If, p. 182 ; Oe^chichte Bahyloniens und Assyriens, p. 291.
'Cf., e. g., Let Origines Orientals, pp. 50, 84 ; Revue d' Assyriulogie III, pp. 54, 57.
' Cf. also Recent Research in BMe Lands, pp. 66f.
" Called so for the sake of brevity. Cf above, p. 35, note 4.
•Published by Houghton In Trans. 8oe. Bibl. Arch., p. 454, and reproduced In several other works.
44 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
I have a right to expect from those who criticise my statements on this subject, must
necessarily come to the conclusion that a much longer period of development lies be-
tween Lugalzaggisi, Urukagina, Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin, on the one hand, and
Sargon and Naram-Sin, on the othei", than between the latter and Ur-Ba'u Gudea,
Ur-Gur, etc. It is surely remarkable that Monsieur Heuzey ^ and myself, who have
devoted years of constant study to the pahcography of the earliest original inscriptions
of Babylonia, quite independently of each other, have reached exactly the same
conclusions. It is out of regard for the view of those who do not accept Nabonidos'
3200 years as correct, that on palaographic evidence alone I assign to Lugalzaggisi
the minimal date of 4000 B.C. My own personal conviction, however, is that he can-
not have lived later than 4500 B.C.
3. That my determination of the age of Lugalzaggisi is not too high is proved
by the discovery of an uninscribed vase of precisely the same material and character-
istic shape'- as most of the vases which bear Lugalzaggisi's inscription. It was found
1.54 m. below the pavement of Naram-Sin, and must therefore considerably antedate
the rule of the latter.
4. Prom palfeographic and other reasons, I came to the conclusion above, that the
inscriptions of Lugalzaggisi and of the other kings, patesis, etc., from Nippur
grouped together with them, are surely older than Edingiranagin. Heuzey, on the
basis of other arguments, had inferred that the stele of vultures and the reliefs of Ur-
!Nina are " surely older than l^aram-Sin." Hence it would follow, that if Ileuzey's
judgment of the age of these specimens of art is correct, also the monuments of Lu-
galzaggisi, etc., antedate Naram-Sin. I am now in the position to prove the correct-
ness of Ileuzey's view beyond question. Since a specimen of the woikmanship of the
artists at Narem-Sin's time was recently discovered (cf. PI. XXH, No. 64), showing
exactly the same high degree of execution as the script on his monuments, every Assyri-
ologist is enabled to judge for himself as to the value of Ileuzey's judgment. There
are, however, a few fiagments of a relief in clay lately discovered in Nippui", which must
be regarded as the strongest evidence in favor of the French scholar's determination.
"While Heuzey declared L^r-Nina's and Edingiranagin's reliefs to be of greater anti-
' It is needless to quote passages from Mr. Heuzey's works in addition to those given on p. 43, note 6. In connec-
tion ■with Lis discussion cf the age of the stele of vultures he makes the emphatic stivlement, "le type line lire de
l'6criture est assuiement plus ancien que celui des inscriptions deNaram-Sin, etc." (cf. Let Origines OrientaUf, p. 50).
'Haynes reported on this vase, August 10, 1895, expressing the hope that I might be able to use it in support of
my theory as to the age of most of the other ancient vase fragments from Nippur. He found it covered with earth
and black ashes. It consists of while calcite stalagmite and has a very characteristic shape never found at a later period
in Nippur again. In general this class of vases resembles a flower-pot, the dlamiter at the top being larger than that
at the bottom, while the walls frequently recede a little at the middle. The size of the above-mentioned vase is : h.,
26.5 ; d. at the top, 18 ; at tlie bottom, 14.8 ; at the middle, 13.8 cm.
CHIEFLY PKOM NIPPUR. 45
qiiity than Naram-Sin's monuments, he characterized the relief which opens the splen-
did sei-ies of De Sarzec's finds (PI. I, JSTo. 1), and has several points of contact with
the art exhibited in the stele of vultures, as " plus primitif, meme que celui de la
grossiere tablette du roi Our-]Nina " [De Sarzec, Z. c, PI. 1, No. 2], and as "une oeuvre
d'une antiquite prodigieuse, un monument des plus precieux, que nous devons le placer
avec respect tout k fait en tete des series orientales, comme le plus ancien example
connu de la sculpture chaldeenne." These words of a true master of his subject have
fonnd a splendid confirmation in the clay reliefs of Nippur just referred to, which
in their whole conception and execution show a striking resemblance to the oldest spe-
cimen of art recovered from Tello. They ivere fonnd 7-7.70 m. below the level of
Naram-Sin's pavement, and within about 1.50 m. of the lowest trace of Babylonian
civilization,^ Truly the genius and critical penetration of Heuzey could not have won
a more biilliant victory.
5. In connection with my examination of the pre-Sargonic strata of Ekur, I twice
called attention to the fact that baked bricks found below Naram-Sin's pavement are
plano-convex in form.^ I might have added that no other form of baked brick has so
far been discovered anywhere in the lowest strata of Nippur, and that these bricks as
a rule bear a simple thumb mark upon their convex side. The form of these baked
bricks, until the contrary has been proved, must therefore be regarded as a character-
istic feature of all structures previous to the time of Sargon I and Naram-Sin. It is
quite in accordance with this view that the only inscribed bricks of Tello which show
this peculiar form, bear the legend of Ur-Nina, whom on other evidence I placed before
Sargon and Naram-Sin.
0. We draw a final and conclusive argument from a door-socket of Sargon him-
self In Part I, PI. 14, Nos. 2.^3-25, I published three brief legends of a king whom,
influenced by Pinches's reading (Garde), I read Gande (pp. 28 ff.), and whom I
regarded as identical with Gandash, the founder of the Cassite dynasty. Ail that I
brought forward in favor of this identity I herewith withdraw ; when I wrote those
'Cf. above, p. 26, note 2. They will be published in Series B of the expedition work edited by myself.
'The bricks of the ancient cuib around the altar, p. 24, and the bricks of the ancient arch, p. 20. In Iiis report
of Oct. 26, 1895, Haynes refers to the discovery of a terra-cotta floor with a rim a little below the pavement of Naram-
Sin. He regards it as a combination of bath and closet, "proving that the present customs and methods of preparing
the body for worship, as practiced by Moslems [in the immediate neighborhood of their mosques], is of very great anti-
quity. Tlie drainage from this floor was conducted into a large vertical tile drain, which is d m. long and has an
average diameter of 85 cm." Tliis tile drain is "supported by a double course of biicks, piano convex in form, with
finger marks on the convex side." For a specimen of Ur-Nina's bricks cf. De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 31, No. 1. Specimens
of this clas-s of Nippur bricks were given by Peters in T/ie American Archmulogical Journal X, p. 34 (two drawings
from the hand of the late Mr. Mayer, t 20 Dec, 1894, in Bagdad). The peculiar shape of these bricks in the arch is
scarcely diglinguishable on PI. XXVHI of the present work.
46 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS.
pages, I was still somewhat inflnenced by the current view of Assyriologists, that
later kings occasionally imitated older patterns in their script. Since then I have
completely shaken oflf this old theory as utterly untenable when contrasted with all the
known facts of Babylonian palaeography. The observation, however, which I made on
p. 29, note 2, that the characters represent the peculiarities of Ur-Kina's inscriptions
was entirely correct. Since then a large number of vase fragments have been exca-
vated, by which I was enabled to confii'm and strengthen my previous judgment based
npon the study of a few squeezes of badly effaced inscriptions and to analyze the pal-
aeographic peculiarities of this whole class of ancient texts completely. I arrived at
once at the result that the three legends published on PI. 14 were written by Lugal-
kigub-nidudu, " lord of Erech, king of Ur," who left us No. 86. Among other gifts,
such as vases, dishes, etc.,^ this sovereign presented a number of unhewn diorite,
calcite, stalagmite and other blocks- to the temple as raw material for future use ' At
the time of Bur-Sin II several of these blocks, of which one is published on PI. XVII,
were still unused.' They had been handed down from a hoary antiquity and scrupu-
lously preserved for c. 1500-2000 years in the temple archive. Bur-Sin II selected a
diorite block from among them, left the few words of its donor respectfully on its side/
tui-ned it into a door-socket, wrote big own inscription on its polished surface and pre-
sented it in this new form to the temple. But something similar happened many hun-
dred yeai-s before. According to Part I, p. 29, section l,** the same rude inscription is
scratched upon the back side of a door-socket of Sargon I. From the analogous case
just treated it follows that Lugal kigub-nidudu must have lived even before Sargon I,
and consequently that all other inscriptions which have the same palseographic peculi-
arities as his own can only be classified as pre-Sargonic.
' Cf. PI. XVIir, 40-48.
^Cf. Part I, p. 29.
'These blocks received therefore only a kind of registering mark scritched merely upon their surface {Oinglr En-
lil(la) Lugal-ki-gub id dudu {ne) a mu-na-ihub, "To Inlil L. presented (this" =ne)). The inscription on the block,
PI. XVII, No. 39, had originally 8 li. according to the truces left. On the diorite blocks these inscriptions are well
preserved; on the calcite blocks however, whose surface corroded and crumbled in the course of six millenniums, they
have suffered considerably. Cf. on the whole question of presenting stones as raw material to the temple, Hilprecht
in Z. A. VIII, pp. 190 ff.
* As shown above.
»Cf. The curses on the statue B of Gudea, col. VII, 59 ff., on the door-sockets of Sargon, PI. 1, 12 ff., PI. 2, 13 ff.,
on the lapis lazuli block of Kadashman-Turgu, PI. 24, pp. 14-20. In the latter case the lapis lazuli was likewise pre-
sented as raw material to be used in the interest of the temple. But the inscription— this was the intention of the
donor— was to be preserved (a thin piece of lapis lazuli being cutoff, cf. PI. XI, No. 2.5) in remembrance of the gift.
"Cf. Part I, "Table of Contents," p. 47.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 47
CONTENTS AIS^D HISTORICAL RESULTS.
In the briefest possible way I will indicate the general results which I draw from
a combined study of the most ancient Nippur and Tello inscriptions. With the very
scanty material at my disposal this sketch can only be tentative in many points. For
every statement, however, which I shall make, I have my decided reasons, which will
be found in other places.^
At the earliest period of history which inscriptions reveal to us, Babylonia has a
high civilization and is known under the name of Kengi, "land of the canals and
reeds,"- which includes South and Middle Babylonia and possibly a part of the North.
Its first ruler of whom we know is " En-shagsag-ana, lord of Kengi.'" Whether he
was of foreign origin or the shaykh of a smaller Babylonian " city " which extended its
influence or the regular descendant of the royal family of one of the larger cities, can-
not be decided. It is therefore impossible to say whether he belonged to the Suraei-ian
or Semitic race, or traced his origin to both. That the Semites were already in the
country results, aside from other considerations,^ fi-om the fact that the human figures on
the stele of Ur-Enlil, which belongs to about the same period," show the characteristic
'In Asgyriaca, part II, in Z. A., and in response to a repeated invitation from the President and Secretary of the
Philosophical Society of Great Britlan, in the Transactions of the latter society, where I expect to give a more
complete sketch of the political and social conditions of ancient Babylonia.
'Cf. No. 90, 4 (also No. 87, col. II, 31) and above p. 33, note 9.
' Ilis inscriptions (Nos. 90-92) have the oldest form of ma, have older forms for sag and show other characteristic
features of high antiquity. His name signifies "lord is the king of heaven."
*Cf for the present only the important argument drawn from Lugalziggisi's inscription No. 87, col. Ill, 36. Here
we have the same writing DAUR, which from the inscriptions of Nebuchadrezzar II and other latest Babylonian
kiogB, is known to be a Semiticism for da.ru. Cf. Delitzsch, AssyrUehea IJandworlerbuch, p. 213.
'It has the most ancient forms for dam and mu and shows a very characteristic feature of the oldest period of
V riling by contracting the name of J)/in-dm-dug(ga), or Ba'u (cf. above p. 38) into a monogram. Tlie primitive
style of art, and such details as the headdress of the god, the short garment of the two persons following the sheep
and goat, the nakedness of Ur-Eulil, the fact that his figure and the other two have their hair shaved off, corrob-
orate my determination of the age of this monument. On llie other hand, this stele and No. 38 of the same plate,
•which doubtless belongs to the same age, show us a real Old Babylonian master, who produced a beautiful ensemble
with a few simple lines, and knew how to breathe life into his very realistic but very graceful figures. Cf. the great
skill he exhibits in his drawing of the graceful outlines of a guzel, and his remarkable knowledge of animal locomo-
tion ! The two animals in No. 87 "represent very characteristically two species, the near one a goat and the far one a
sheep. The goat shows more characteristics of the wild species of Eastern Persia and Afghanistan than of the Per-
sian, and so may be a domestic hybrid between the two (i. «., Vaprafalconerii and Gapra mgagrua). The sheep is
probably also derived from Eastern Persia and is perhaps the ' urial ' Ooit vignei, which is an ally of the domestic
sheep. It has resemblance also to the Armenian wild sheep Oois gmeUnii, but the rugosity of the horns is too great,
and the lines are loo vertical " (communication from my colleague. Dr. Edward D. Cope, Professor of Z'jiilogy and
Compaiative Anatomy, who kindly examined the monument).
48 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
features of a mixed race.^ The capital of this early kingdom is likewise unknown.^
In all probability it was Erech.'* The religious centre of Kengi was the sanctuary of
Inlil at Nippur.* It stood under the especial care of every ruler who claimed supreme
authority over the country, and who called himself patesi gal InlilJ' to define his posi-
tion as being obtained by divine authority. The chief local administrator of the tem-
ple in Nippur seems to have had the title damkar gaU This I infer from my analysis
of the meaning of damkar and from the inscriptions of Nos. 94 and 95 in connection
with No, 96, where a certain Aba-Inlil (= KisJiit-Bel) who has the title of damkar,
presents a vase to Ninlil '• for the life of Ur-Inlil, patesi of Nippur."' Ur' and Larsam"
and doubtless other places whose names are not yet known from inscriptions, were
prominent cities in this early Babylonian kingdom. They had their own sanctuaries,
which stood under the control of a patesi. This title characterizes its bearer, according
to his religious position, as sovereign lord of a temple and chief servant of the god
worshiped in it. The fact that a patesi, in addition, often occupied a political position
as king or governor, does not interfere with this view. He is first of all the highest
official of his god, representing him in his dealings with his subjects ; in other words,
■ Prof. Cope wrote me on this subject : " The shortness of the jaws however is certainly not a Semitic character in
human faces, and this character renders the physiognomy very peculiar. The hooked nose and large eyes on the con-
trary are Semitic. As a result I should say the figures represent an Aryan race with some Semitic tendencies. The
identification of such a race is of much interest [indeed it is of vital importance for the whole Sumerian question !
— H.]. The people evidently have no Mongolian tendencies."
'It may have stood in No. 90, 5, lugal which is only preserved in part. The traces do not point to the ideo-
gram of Unug, more to kalama.
' Cf. Nos. 86, 4-14 ; also the fact that Erech is the capital of Lugal kigub-nidudu and Lugalzaggisi and is promi-
ncntly mentioned in Edingiranagin's inscriptions. Cf. also Hommel, Geschichte, p. 206, and especially p. 300, observe
the important position which Erech holds in the titles of the kings of the dynasty of Isin en {aJiega) Unuga^ [N. B.
Winckler's reading of Part I, No. 26, 3, as Sin-ga-mil, is an absolute paloeographic impossibility. If anything, the
reading of this line as Unvgki-gage is sure beyond question (against Winckler, Altorientaliiche Forschungen III, p.
274)].
•Of. above, p. 23, and among other points, especially No. 87, col. I, 36-41.
'Cf. No. 87, col. I. A similar title occurs in the inscriptions of Tello, patesi gal Ningirsu (Entemena and his sron
Enanatuma). Apparently at an early time the god Ninib received the title pate»i gal Inlil (PI. 5.5, Obv. 17), and the
kings and governors were satisfied with the title patesi Inlil.
«Cf. No. 94: ]. Dininr Mn-din-dug, 3. Ur-dmir En-lil, 3. damkar gal, 4. a-mu shvb, "To Ba'u Ur-Enlil the chief
agent {seil. of Inlil) devoted (it)." The current translation of damkar. "merchant," is too narrow in many passages.
Cf also No. 95: l.ll>inoirJi-iindin-dugga2. Ur-Ma-ma 3. Id^am-kar 4. ['iiEr\n[lil'\ 5. \^a-muna shub'\. "To Ba'u Ur-
Mama, agent of Enlil presented it." Tor <lmgir Ma-ma ct. the ideogram of Gula, '««»«'■ J/«.me in later texts (e.g.,
Strassmaier, Cambyses, 145, 8) and the goddess Mami II R. 51, 55", and in old Babylonian contracts (the last two
references I owe to Jensen). From the fragment of an inscribed stone in Bagdad I copied the phrase "damkar
dingir DVN-OI preceded by the titles of a king of the second dynasty of Ur, and followed by dingir Uru'^-ka.
' Cf No. 97, which seems to have been devoted by this very [UrjEnlil, patesi of Nippur, to B8I.
»Cf. Nos. 86 and 87, col. 11, 30-82, mentioned also by Edingiranagin.
•Cf. No. 87, col. II, 33-37.
CHIEFLY PROM NIPPUR. 49
he is the legitimate possessor of all the privileges connected with this title. These
privileges vary according to the sphere of power which a god exercises beyond the
limits of his temple or city, and depend chiefly ujion the popularity of his cult, the per-
sonal devotion and energy of his human representativ^e, and, more than anything else,
upon the strength and valor of the city's army. In order to define them accui'ately, it
is first of all necessary to determine the political power of the god's city in each indi-
vidual case. As soon as we have a clear conception of the latter, we have the key to
a correct understanding of the position and privileges of its patesi. But the title itself
does not express any reference either to the political dependence or independence of its
bearer.'
A troublesome enemy of Babylonia at this early period was the city of Kish,
which therefore did not form part (any longer?) of Kengi proper. It had apparently
its own peculiar cult and stood under the administration of a patesi,^ who was eager to
extend his influence far beyond the limits of his cit}', and sought every opportunity to
encroach upon the territory of his southern neighbor. For Kish is styled yul shag *
" wicked of heart," or ga gul^ "teeming with wickedness." The very fact that one
' Winckler, AUorientalische Forsehungen. IH, pp. 29iS. gives a very good analysis of the relation of a god to his
city and of the origin and growth of Oriental states in general, and of the Babylonian kingdom in particular, but his
view as to the meaning and use of the word patesi is entirely incorrect ("diegebrauchlichc Bezeichnuqg fiir die unter-
worfenen Konige ist in Babylonien patesi," p. 234). An iuteresling monument from Tello, recently published by
Heuzey in liecue d' AsuyrvAogie, serves as an excellent illustration of tlie cprrjctness of my detinition, which I share
with Tiele (Z. A. VII, p. 373), Homrael (Oeschichle, p. 294 f.) and other Assyriologists. The inscription to which I
refer had defied the united efforts of Oppert, Eleuzey and myself for a long while. But I am now able to offer the
following correct interpretation. Si! Lugal Kish, saaga tttNin-su-gir (sir,/) *l" Sin, au-gir mu-giii, Lugal-kurun-zigam
pa-te-si 8ldr[p>iryl\_iJ'i-'\, "Decision ! Nmsugir has appointed the king of Kish as priest of Ninsugir. Lugil-kurum
zigum is patesi of Shirpurla." This valuable document is important in more than one way. The whole phraseology
Bcems to be Semitic rather than Sumerian (cf. also sanga artificial ideogram composed of sa -\- ga). The name means
Sharrukarumal-shame, "The king is food of heaven " (" Der Konig ist Hiniinelsspeise "). A foreign conqueror of
Shirpurla, who is already a king, in addition styles himself patesi of Lagash, expressly declaring that Ningirsu him-
self, the higheet god of tlie city, called him to fill this office. The condition of affairs is here pl.iin. The conqueror
seeks to represent to the people and to the priesthood his violent act as having been committed in the service of their
god and carrying out his decision. Tlierefore he does not call himself king — which he already was — nor patesi in the
sense of our governor, because he cannot designate himself as his own subject, but patesi as the highest oftioial of the
god Ningirsu, in the care of his temple and in the admiiiistration of that territory over which Ningirsu ruled ; ia
other word.<, as the legitimate possessor of all the privileges which, up to the time of his conquest, had been connected
with this title. Cf. IlilprechI, Recent Research in Bible Lands, pp. 71 ff.
*Cf. Nog. 108 and 109 (portions of the same vase). The beginning (No. 108) is to be restored as follows:
1. DmgirZaima-ma'\ 2. U-dug- .... 3. pat[e»i'] 4. Ki[sJi.i-i'\.
' No. 92, 4.
*No. 102, 4. Oa is written phonetically for ga{n), Briiiinow, List 4039, as becomes clear from a comparison of
No. 113, 4 with Sand No. 112, 4. No. 1 12 reads as follows : \. Dingir^fin-Ul 'i. DinglrEnlil-la{l) 3. damn ad-dage
4. ga til la shu 5. nam-ti 6. damdumu nashu 7. a-mu na-shub, "To Ninlil and Inlil the son of the ada (sciZ. of the
temple of Inlil, No. 113, Ot.) presented it for abundance of life, for the life of his wife and child." Apparently a son
CO OLD BABYLONIAN INSCKIPTIONS
patesi of K'sh presented a large sandstone vase to Inlil of Nippur, shows us that tem-
porarily he was even in possession of an important part of Kengi, inchiding the sanc-
tuary of Bel. Enshagsagana himself waged war against his northern enemy, and
presented the spoil of this expedition to Inlil of Nippur.^ The same was done by an-
other king of Kengi, who lived shortly before or after. He infested Kish and defeated
or even captured its king, Enne-Ugun.'^ " His statue, his shining silver, the utensils,
his property," he carried home victoriously, and deposited in the same sanctuary as his
■was born unto liim, and the happy father presented a vase to the temple. Cf. Jenfen in Schrader's K. B. Ill, part 1,
p. 25, II (where Jensen and Amiaud, however, mii-read the name of the donor. As the sepaialing lines clearly prove,
the name is not Ur-Mlil but Ir-Enlildabidudv). No. 113 reads : 1. Dmgirmn-Ulra 2. Uinna-badabi 3. sang
(Amiaud et Mechineau, Talleau, No. 134) dingirjtn-lU 4. gan-tilla-shu 5. Ur-Simvg (Amimid et Mechineau, I. c. No.
117) -ga (<'ingirSi7miga — Ea.\) 6. dvbsar ada 1. e<>™girjin-lilkage 8. gatilasJiu 9. nam-H 10. ama dvg(sic.')-zit7M
11. nnmti \^. damdvn<v-va.s:hu 13. a ?nMna-*/(K6, "To Ninlil Uiunabadabi, priest of Inlil, for abundance of life,
and Ur-Siniuga (' servant of Ea'), scribe of the ada of the temple of Inlil {ada e identical with the frequent title of
the later contract literature abu litH), for abundance of life presented it for the life of his (distributive = their !) good
and faithful molhir, and lor the life of his (their) wife and child." Apparently two brothers who held two different
positions in the temple of Eel presented together this beautiful vase for their mother, wives and children. Cf.
also No. 106: 1. H^mrHin-Alin^dvg-ga 2. Kw-in-rm (cf. Lvgalen-nv, No. 114, 5) 3. ga-lil-la-shu 4. a-mu-
■na[-sliub'], "ToB&'xi Mnerinu((oT en-nun = na^aru !) presented it lor abundance of life." My constant transliteration
of the postposition " ku" by shu needs a word of explanation. I believe with Jensen, that no Sumerian postposition
ku exists, and that the old Babylonian sign of this postposition transliterated by ku is rather identical with the charac-
ter in Part I, PI. 1, 13 ; PI. 2, 13, which I identified as thu (I. c, pp. 13 f ).
'Cf. Nds. 91 and 93, which supplement each other: 1. \_l>mg{rJi,-]n-Hl-la 2. En-shag sagan-na 3. nig-ga Eishl'i
4. gill sJiag 5. a-mu-na-flivb, " To Inlil E. presented the property of Kish, wicked of heart (referiing to Kish)." In
connection with this text I call attention to the fiict that the woid nnmrag "spoil," the etymology of which was ob-
scure (cf. Part I, p. 21) is purely Sumerian, being composed of nam-\-ri-\-ag (V B. 20, 18c), corresponding to Assyrian
shallaiu ihalalu (cf. Delilzsch, Assyr. Oram,., gg 73, 132), a synonym of thallatu " spoil."
''Several vase fragments mention this event, but the whole inscripti( n cannot jet be restored from them. Nos.
103 -f 110 belong to the same vase. Nos. 104 and 105, which contain portions of the same inscription and supplement
par-t of the text, belong to two other vases. The fragment of a fourth vase, No. 102, contains part of the same inscription.
For C. B. M. 9297, which has remnants of 1. 1-4 of No. 102, agrees in thickness, material and characters of writing
(Dtiiely with Nos. 103 + 110 and belonged doubtless to the same vase. No. 105 had a briefer inscription than the rest.
Of the 1( nger inscription the Ixginnirg is wanting, the first preserved portion. No. 1C3, is to be supplemented by No.
104, to be continued by No. 102, 2, and (after a break of si veral lines) to be closed with No. 110. I restore the in-
scription as fiillows : 1. [lH^gi^En-Ul-la 2. [Ivgal km-lurra 3. Name of the king 4. [«n Ei-tngi'] 5. (No. 103 begins)
ilV^gal .... &. vd iiingir[En-lil-U'] 6. mana-ni-yun-a (cf. No. 86, 1-5) 7. Eiah^-i 8. mvyvl 9. En-ne-Vgwi (BiViU-
now, 1j«<88G2, cf. Jensen in Z A. I, p. 57f.) 10. Ivgal EuUi 11. mu-dvr 12. Jvgal erim ff'sl'BA'Nl'i-ka-ge 13. Ivgal
Eiili>^i-ge 14. ?;rtt-na ja (written phonetically = (7o«, Biirnnow, List 4039, for cf. No. 113, 4, with 8 and No. 112, 4)
yul 15. nig-ga IG bil 17-18 (or more) wanting 19. mu-ne-gi 20. alana-bi (observe the peculiar sign for bi in
Nos. 105 and 110!), 21. azag-zaginabi 22. ginJinig-ga-bi 23. <Him'En-Hl-la 24. [K'^nliV^i-slM 25. a mu-na-slmb ["To
Inlil, lord of lands, N. N., lord of Shumer (king of Erech)] — when he had looked favorably upon him (=na«/(« sha
ehi, Briinnow, List 10545), he infested Kish, he cast down (or bound? cf. Jensen in Schrader's A'. B. Ill, part 1,
p. 48) Enne-Ugun, king of Kish ; the king of the hordes of £«'«''BANi"*, king of Kish — his city teeming with ma-
lignitj', the property .... he burned he brought back, and his statue, his shining silver, the utensils (t«u =
anu, II i?. 23, 9 e.f ), liis property, he presented unto Inlil of Nippur." The reading of the name of the king of Kish
is of course only provisional. He was apparently a Semite.
CHIEFLY PROM NrPPLTK. 51
predecessor. It is highly interesting to learn from the votive inscription with which
the Babylonian ruler accompanied his gift (l^o. 102), that the king of Kish apparently
had connections with the city of ^''''BAN'. For he is styled " king of the hosts of
^"''BAX*', king of Kish." In other words, we find the two mentioned cities in exactly
the same close association as they appear on Edingiranagin's famous stele of vultures.
It is therefore evident that the king of Kish was not only an ally of "'^'BA^', but as
commander of an army of this country, was in all probability himself a native of
^''''BAK". In other words, I infer from this and other passages, that Kish (which I
believe formed originally part of Kengi) at this early time was already under the
control of a foreign people, which came from the ^N^orth, appea/ed at the threshold of
the ancient Sumerian kingdom of Kengi, and was constantly pushing southward.
Kish formed the basis of its military opsrations, and at this tims was, in fact, th3 ex-
treme outpost of the advancing hordes of ""''BAI^'', serving as a border fortification
against Kengi. The success of the Babylonian monai'ch who defeated Enne-Ugun,
cannot have lasted very long. For another king of Kish, Ur-Shulpauddu,^ presented
several inscribed vases " to Inlil, lord of lands, and to N^inlil, misti'css of heaven and
earth, consort of Inlil" (N^o. 93), and was therefore in the possession of Nippur. He
must have dealt a fatal blow to the kingdom of Kengi, for besides his usual title lagal
K'lsh he assumed another, which unfortunately is broken away.' To judge from the
analogy of other inscriptions of this period, I have no doubt it contained the acquired
land or province of which Kish had now become the capital,' scarcely, however, Kengi
itself How long he ruled, how far his kingdom extended, and whether he was able to
hold his conquests, we do not know. So much is csrtain, the great centre in the
North which controlled the movements of its warriors in the South, continued to send
out its marauding expeditions against Babylonia. And even if a temporaiy reaction
occasionally should have set in, the weakened South could not withstand the youthful
strength and valor of its northern enemies for any length of time. At last ""'''BAN'
was prepared to deal the final blow to the ancient kingdom of Kengi, however little
of it there may have been left. The son of " Ukush, patesi of ""''BAN^^ was this
time himself the chief commander of the approaching array. Erech opened its doors,
and the rest of Babylonia down to the Persian gulf fell an easy prey to the conquer-
ing hero. A hero indeed, Lugalzaggisi was, if we can trust his own long inscription
' "Servant of Sliulpauddu." The same name occurs occasionally in Uie early contracls of Nippur and Tello. Cf.
Scbeil in Rece.uil XVII, p. 41.
'Traces of lugalnxa clearly visible in 1. 8.
' No. 87, col. I, 5.
*/. «., "Tlie king is filled with unchangeable power." Cf. Nimrod Ep., 13, 39; Oilgamesh gitnalu emUku. The
name is possibly to be read Semitic.
52 OLD BABYLOXIAIf IKSCRIPTION8
of 132 lines,' carved over 100 times on as many large vases, which he presented to the
old national sanctuary of the country in Xippur.
The titles themselves with which he opens his dedication are a reflex of the great
achievements he could Wst of: Col. I, 3. " Lugalzaggisi, 4. king of Erech, 5. king
of the world, G. priest of Ana, 7. hero 8, of Nidaba, i). son of Ukush, 10. patesi of
'■^'"BAW-'\ 11. hero 12. of I^idaba, 13-14. he who was favorably looked upon by the
faithful eye of Lugalkurkura (^. e., Inlil), 15. great patesi 10. of Inlil, 17. unto whom
intelligence was given 18. by Enki- (= Ea), 19. he who was called (chosen) 20. by
Utu, 21. sublime minister' 22. of Enzu (=!Sin), 23. he who was invested with power
24. by Utu,^ 25. fosterer of Ninna. 2G. a son begotten 27. by Nidaba, 28. he who was
nourished with the milk of life 29. of Nin-harsag,'^ 30. servant of Umu, priestess of
Erech, 31. a slave brought up 32. by Nin-a-gid-ga'-du, 33. mistress of Erech, 34. the
great abardkku of the gods." ' He was one of the greatest monarchs of the ancient
■It ia the longest complete inscriplion of the fourth and fifth pre-Christian millenniums so far obtained from Baby-
lonia, and as a historical document of this ancient period it is of fundamental importance. The text published on Pis.
38-42, No. 87, was restored by myself from 88 fragments of 64 different vases under the most trying circumstances. The
work -was just as much a mathematical task as it was a palaiographical and pliilological problem. On the basis of
palajographical evidence I selected c. 150 pieces out of aheap of c. COO fragments and parlicUs. Then I succeeded in
placing the five fragments on PI. XIX, No. 49, together. By doing this I obtained the beginnings and ends of each
column. I noticed that the lines of each of the first two columns must be identical, as the separating lines run from
the first to the last column. The difference of tlie numbers of lines between the second and third lines I could easily
determine by a simple calculation. It was more difficult to find out the exact number of lines of which the first and
second columns originally consisted. By calculating the original circumference, and making a number of logical
combinations, I arrived at the conclusion, which finally proved to be correct, tliut eacli of llie first two columns had
forty-six and the third only forty lines. Then followed the tedious work of arranging the little Iragments and deter-
mining their exact position, although often enough not more than a few traces of the original cliaracters were left to
guide me. I had the complete translation prepared for this volume, but I am obliged to withdraw it from want of
space. In the previous and following pages nearly two-thirds of the whole inscription have been treated, according to
the passages needed. A complete coherent transliteration and translation will be found in another place very soon.
Since the restoration of my text, Ilaynes has found many duplicates, which in every case confirmed the correctness of
my arrangement. Col. Ill, 25f. can now be restored completely.
■■'Of. Jensen in Schrader's E. B. Ill, Part 1. The titles of Lugalzaggisi are not unsimilar to those of kings and
patesis of Tello.
'Cf. above, p. 41, note 6.
•One expects rather the ideogram for ahakkanakku (Briinnow, List 919-)). Ne (" power ")-4- g'ts/t ("man")
apparently is its synonym. Cf. sag ginh, I fl , 2, No. 5, 1 (and 2), 3 ; the present work. Part I, No. 81, 7.
'Literally "ate" (akain) or "was filled with" {»lmznunu).
•The variant is a peculiar form of ga (not =t(/t), cf. col. Ill, 21, 23 and variants.
'No. 87, col. I, 1. Oii'flirEn-lil 2. lugal kur kur-ra 3. Lugal-zag-gisi 4. Ivgal Unuyki.ga 5. lugal kalam-ma 0. slab
Ani.a 7. galu mag 8. dingir JS'idaba 9. dumu Vkuah 10. [pa-f]e-si giehBANM 11. galu mug 12. dmyiri;idnba-ka 13. t^rt zi
bar-ra 14. dimrLvgalku?' kurra lo. pa te si gal 16. <iir>air En-lil 17. gishPl-SaU-sum-ma 18. dmgirEN-Kl 19. mu-pad-
da 20 dmffirrjiu 21. lug mag 2-3. dingirEniu 23. ne-gUh 24. dingirutu 25. u-a dinglrMnna 20. dumu tu-da 27. dingirMdaba
28. gazikua 29. dlngirj^in-Juir sag 'AQ. galudingirUriiu sanga Unvg'^'i-ga 31. sag eyia 32. dingirMn-a gid-ya-du 33. nin
Unvgti-ga-ka 84. iti (?) may 35. dingir-ri-ne-ra.
CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUR. 53
East, and yet his very name had been forgotten by later generations. He lived long
before Sargon I founded his famous empire, and he called a kingdom his own which
in no way was inferior to that of his well-known successor, extending from the Persian
Gulf to the shores of the Mediterranean. I quote the king's own poetical language :
"When Inlil, lord of the lands, invested Lugalzaggisi with the kingdom of the
world and granted him success before the world, when he filled the lands with his
renown (power) (and) subdued (the country) from the rise of the sun to the setting
of the sun — at that time he straightened his path from the lower sea of the Tigris and
Euphrates to the upper sea and granted him the dominion of everything (?) from the
rise of the sun to the setting of the sun and caused the counti'ies to rest (dwell) in
peace." ^ It becomes evident from this passage, in whicli Lugalzaggisi declares him-
self to have been invested with the kingdom of the world by Inlil of JSippur, "lord
of the lands," that only Nippur can have been the ancient seat of the sharrut kibrat
arhaHm, which manifestly is but the later Semitic rendering of the ancient Sumerian
nam-lugal lalama. I have examined all the passages in the fresh light of this text
and find that >i'ippur fulfills by far better the required conditions than Kutha or any
other city which has been proposed in Xorthei-n Babylonia. But, be it remembered, to
the early kings of Babylonia this title meant more than a mere possession of the city
whose god claimed the right of granting the sharrut kibrat arbaHm. Down to the
time of Hammurabi only those laid claim to this significant title who really owned
territory far beyond the north and south of Babylonia, who, in the Babylonian sense
of the word, had conquered a quasi worldwide dominion, defined by the four natural
boundaries (Part I, p. 25). The later Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions are of
value for the determination of the meaning of this title at their own time, but they
have little importance for the question as to its origin and earliest localization, if the
title must be localized at all hazards.
According to the manner of usui-pers,' Lugalzaggisi retained Erech, the old
metropolis of the country, as his own new capital of this first great Oi-iental state, of
which Kengi became now the chief province. Babylonia^ as a whole,^ had no fault
■ Col. I, 36. Ud dingirEn-lil 37. lugal kur-kur-ra 38. Lugalzaggisi 39. nam-lugal 40. kalam-ma 4t. ma na-min ma a
42. igi kalam-ma-ge 43. sima, nadi-a 44. kur-kur{a)ne na 4). ma-ni-sig ga-a 46. Utu. e[ii)ta. Col. II, 1. Vlu shu(ii,)-
thu 2. gu v.ar,agar-ra-a 3. u-la-ba 4. a ab ba 5. sig-ta ta 6. Idigna 7. BuraniLnu{vi\lh.o\x\. cloteriii.)-6t(= "and ") 8. a-
ab-ba 9. igi nim ma-sliu 10. gira-bi 11. n-mi-nadi 12. Vta e{a)la 13. Utu, ihu{a)-shu 14. [dingirE^u-Hl H 15 nin,
16 muni dug 17. kur kvr{a) u sal la 18. mu-da-na.
2 Of Dungi we know too litlle to call liim an excpption. Of the kings of the second dynasty of Ur, who assunieJ
the proud title, we know now from Pis. 5j and 58 (cf. above, p. 3) and note 4) that they had made conquests as far
as Syria and Elam.
'Well stated by Wiiickler, Aliorienlalische Forschungen III, p. 234.
* Cf. col. II, 19. kalamna 30. afyullu mu-da-ga {— shaKanu) 21. bar-bar Kien-gi 33. pa-k-si kur kur-ra, etc., etc.
64 OLD BABTLOKIATSr INSCRIPTIONS
to find with this new and powerful r%iine. The Siiraerian civUization was directed
into new channels and prevented from stagnation ; the ancient cults between the lower
Tigris and Euphrates began to revive and its temples to shine in new splendor. Erech,
Ur/ Larsa - and Nippur ' received equal attention from their devoted patesi. But first
of all, "'^''BA N*' itself, the native city of the great conqueror, was raised bj his energy
and glory to a position of unheard-of influence and political power. Lugalzaggisi
stands out from the dawn of Babylonian history as a giant who deserves our full
admiration for the work he accomplished. He did not appear unexpectedly on the
scene of his activity. We had been prepared for the collapse of the ancient monarchy
on the Persian Gulf, with its long but unknown history, by the preceding invasions
and victories of the Xorthern hordes to which he belonged. And yet when suddenly
this great empire of Lugalzaggisi stands before our eyes as a fait accompli, we can
scarcely conceive, whence it came and how it arose.
There is no doubt in my mind that Lugalzaggisi's achievements in Babylonia
represent the first signal success of the invading Semites from the Xorth. On the
previous pages we have seen how these hordes were pushing gradually southward.
After for a number of years they had concentrated their attacks upon the border forti-
fications of Northern Babylonia and had established a military station and kingdom in
Kish, it was but a question of time when the whole country in the South had to suc-
cumb to their power. The oldest written monuments of Babylonia do not designate
these enemies by any single definite name: they are the hordes of the city of "'^''B AX*'
and Kish combined, apparently but two centi-es of the same powerful people which
was roaming over the fertile steppes of Mesopotamia, and whose chief stronghold
doubtless was "^'BA^;". What ancient city, then, is this ""''B AX"? That we have
not to place it "in Susian territory," as Maspero' is tempted to do, is beyond question.
The ideogram for lugal on an inscribed object of Tello and presented by a king of
'^'■"'BAX*' (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 5, Xo. 3), points with necessity to the north for the
location of our city. As this peculiar form of the chai-acter for lugal so far has only
been found in such cuneiform inscriptions as contain Semitic words written phoneti-
cally, or in other texts which are written ideographically, but, on the basis of stiong
arguments ' must be read as Semitic, we are forced to the conclusion that this charac-
'Col. 11, 30-33. Uruml^i -ma gudu-gim ung ana-shu mu-ym gur, "Urlike a steer he raised to Uie top of heaven."
»Col. ir, 33-37. LarsamM ur king dinffirUtu-ge ane-yulla mu-darja. ForfZisiBANA' of. ibidtm, 38-13.
"As becomes evident from his titles and from the extraordinary number of vases presented to Inlil.
* The Pawn of Chilhation, p. 608. Cf. also Ileuzcy in De Saizec, / c, p. 183.
» Cf. for the present above, p. 49, note 1. More on tills subject and on " the Semitic influence in early cuneiform
writing in general in another place. My above statement is the result of a complete and exhaustive examination of
all the published cuneiform material in which the peculiar form of lugal occurs.
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 55
ter, while doubtless derived from the well-known Sumerian form, was invented and
employed by a Semitic nation. Furthermore, I call attention to the important fact
that Lugalzaggisi, who was surely a Semite/ shows his nationality in various ways,
such as the use of certain phrases, which look very suspicious in an ancient Sumerian
inscription,- and especially in his use of the ideogram da-ur, doubtless of Semitic
origin (= ddru), for " eternal." ^ There is only one ancient place in Northern Meso-
potamia which could have been rendered as "the city of the bow" ideographically by
the Sumerians, namely Harran, with which ^^'BAN*' is doubtless identical. For
according to Arabic writers, especially ^Zftirimi (ed. Sachau, p. 204),^ the ground-plot
of llarran resembled that of the moon (?'. e., the crescent or half-moon), and Sachau,
who gave us the first accurate sketch of this city, finds it very natural that " Arabic
writeis could conceive the idea of comparing it with the form of the half-moon." ^
Excellent, however, as this Arabic description is, and valuable as it proves for our final
location of ^"'BAN*', the ancient Babylonian ideographic rendering as " city of the
bow " was a more faithful description of the peculiar way in which Harran was built
than any other, as everybody can easily convince himself by throwing a glance upon
Sacliau's plan in his Meise in Syrien und Mesopotamien. This correct solution of a
vexed problem becomes of fundamentaV importance for our whole conception of the
history of the ancient East. First of all, I have furnished a better basis for Winckler's
ingenious theory of the original scat of the i^harrut Tcislisliati. All that could be gath-
ered from later historical sources, beginning with the end of the second millennium
before Christ, Winckler brought together to formulate a view which never found much
favor with Assyiiologists and historians/' I opposed it myself" on the ground that his
reasons proved nothing for the ancient time, because Harran was never mentioned in
a text before the period just stated, and that in view of the total absence of a single
' If he did not sidopt a Sumerian name when ascending the throne of Kengi and of the " kingdom of the world,"
■which is very probable, the name of (lie king must be read something like Sharnimali emu'cikeni (emiiia is masc.
and tem. in the singular). But the name cannot be regarded as the prototype of Sargon I (=:Sharru-kenu), because,
aside from other reasons, this kind of abbreviation of a fuller name is without parallel in tlie history of Assyrian proper
names. They are abbreviated at the beginning or end, but not in the middle. Cassite names, etc., are foreign names.
'Cf., e.g., " from the lower sea of tlie Tigris and Euphrates to the upper sea," " from the rising of the sun to the
Belting of the tun " and others, wliich remind us forcibly of the phraseology of the latest Assyrian monarchs.
'Col. Ill, 36. daur yeme, "he may pronounce (speak) forever !"
*Cf. also Mez, GescMchte dir Sladt Harran in Metopotamien, p. 9. The remark of the Arabic writer is therefore
more than a " Treppenwilz," and is of great historical importance, showing us that not only the ancient Babylonians
but other peoples were struck by the remarkable form in wliich Harran was built.
' Sacliau, Seise in iSyrien vnd Mesopotamien, p. 233.
• Cf. especially Winckler, Allorientulische Forachangen I, pp. 75ff ; III, pp. 201 ff.
'Part I, pp. 23 f, I was supported in this, e. g., by Jensen in Z. A. VIII, pp. 228 flF.
56 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCHIPTIONS
reference to this city in our whole ancient literature previous to 1590 B. C, we could
not speak of it as the seat of a kingdom until we first proved that the city really ex-
isted. From the fact that (1) Klsh and KisJi (sJiatu) did not only sound alike but
were even used interchangeably in the inscriptions/ (2) that many other ancient
Babylonian cities (cf Shirpurla)- are frequently written without a determinative, (3)
that the city of Kish played a very important role in the inscriptions of Edingirana-
gin,^ (4) that all the ancient empires arose from city kingdoms, and from several other
considerations,^ I inferred that shar KISII meant originally " king of Kish," a com-
bination which Winckler himself regarded " naheliegend. ""' But notwithstanding
the great importance which must be attached to the kingdom of Kish in connection
with the final overthrow of the ancient empire of Keii)gi, Kish was not the principal
leader in this whole conquest, but was controlled by a greater power in the North,
I Tarran, as I have shown above. Having therefore demonstrated the existence of the
city of Ilarran at the threshold of the fifth and fourth pre-Christian millenniums, which
Winckler failed to do, although Edingiranagin's inscriptions, which necessarily formed
the starting point of my operations, had been at his disposal for some time, and hav-
ing furthermore indicated the powerful position which Ilarran must have occupied as
the great Semitic centre of the ancient Orient, I am now prepared to accept Winckler's
theory of the original seat of the skarrut kishshati without reserve. I regard the title
as the Assyrian equivalent of the Sumerian nam-lugal halama. In view of the lead-
ing part that Harran had taken in the establishment of the first " kingdom of the
world " under Lugalzaggisi, Harran became the seat of the Semitic sharrut hisTishati
just as Nippur was the centre of the Sumerian nam-lugal Jcalama. When after many
vicissitudes under Sargon I and Naram-Sin finally the northern half of ancient
Kengi, including Nippur, was definitely occupied by a Semitic population, which
spoko, and wrote its own language, the old Sumerian title nam-lugal Jcalama, which
cairied the same meaning for the inhabitants of Babylonia as sliarrCd Mshsliati did for
' Cf. Wiuckler, I. c, pp. 144 f.
'la the inscriptions of Ui-Nina wriUcn without ki.
'Not only in his stele of vultures, but" also in the inscription unearthed in London (Proc. Soe. DM. Arch., Nov.,
1890). Ilommel was of the opinion {Die Idtntitat der aUesten babylonisthen und agypUschen OoUergenealogie, p.
212), that llie passage in the latter text escaped my attention. I simply had no use for it : (1) lugal Kish an ki is some-
thing entirely ditlerent from Ivgal an-ub da tabtabba or lugal KISH ; for if it was possible to say so in Sumerian, it
could only mean " king of the whole heaven and earth," wliich the king of course did not want to say. (J) Tlie text
does not offer this at all, but must be translated lagal Kishi^i -linadib-bi, "aud the king of Kish," in other words Jtis
copula = "and," connecting KUh^i with what stood before. Cf. in the present work, PI. 87, col. II, 7 ("and " the
Euphrates).
*Cf. PartL pp. 23 f.
^ Altorientalische Furschungenll, \).\ih, RO\.e\. .
CHIEFLY FROM NIPrUR. 57
the Semites of Northern Mesopotamia, disappeared and was translated into the Sem-
itic sharrut Jcibrat arhaHm. The later Sumerian nam-lugal "^"ub-da-tah-tah-ba is
nothing but a translation from the Semitic title back into the sacred Sumerian lan-
guage by Semitic scribes of the third millennium B. C.
N"ot long after Lugalzaggisi's death a reaction seems to have set in. Sugir gen-
erally transliterated as Glrsu, which Urukagina or one of his predecessors raised from
the obscurity of a provincial town to the leading position in the new kingdom of Shir-
purla, must be regarded as the centre of a national Sumerian movement against the
Semitic invaders. " The lord of Sugir," Nin-Sugir, became the principal god, and
his emblem -the lion-headed eagle with outspread wings, occasionally appearing in
connection with two lions, which are victoriously clutched in its powerful talons^ — ba-
came the eoat-of-arms of the city and characterizes best the spirit of independence
which was fostered in its sanctuary. Urukagina's successors, especiall}' Ur-Nina,
devoted their time to building temples and fortifying the city of Shirpurla and, as
faithful patesis, impressed the power and glory of their warlike deity upon their sub-
jects. The cult of Nin-Sugir cannot be separated from the national uprising which
started from his sanctuary, Edingiranagin at last felt strong enough to shako off the
obnoxious yoke of the Semitic oppressors of Kish and Harrln. The decisive battle
which was fought must have been very bloody. The Sumerians won it, and they cel-
ebrated their victory, which restored a temporary power and influence over the greater
part of Kengi to them, in the famous stele of vultures set up by Edingiranagin.
Erech and Ur played a prominent part in this national war. The former retained its
place as the capital of the nam-en. (of Kengi), but Ur seems to have furnished the
new dynasty, as I infer from No. 86.
Although No. 86 of my published texts belongs doubtless to the same general
period as No. 87, a detailed examination of its palaeographic peculiarities leads me to
place it somewhat later, and to regard it as about contemporary with the inscriptions of
the kings of Shirpurla, especially with those of Edingiranagin. We learn from it the
following:' "When Inlil, the loi'd of the lands, announced life unto Lugal-kigub-
nidudu, when he added lordship to kingdom, establishing Erech as (the seat of) the
lordship (the empire) and Ur as (the seat of) tlie kingdom, Lugal-kigub-nidudu pre-
sented this for the great and joyful lot (which he received) unto Inlil, his beloved
■ Cf. Heuzey's treatise Let Armoiriet G/ialdeennes.
'Five different legends liave been found of tliis ruler: (I) \ brief legend of Ibrce lines (cf. PI. 14), (3) one
of seven or eight lines (cf PI. XVII, No. 39), (3) one of nineteen lines, (I) an even larger one of c. thirty lines, (5)
No 88. Of the third class a fragment was excavated after the prepiralion of my plates, which contained the closing
lines 17-19. The precise connection between the upper and lower portions on PI. 37 cannot be given at present.
68 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCEIPTIOKS CIIIKFLT FROM NIPPUR.
lord for his life.'" In Lugal-kigub-nidudu- and his son (?) Lugal-kieal-si^ we have
therefore the first representatives of the fiist dynasty of Ur. Ur-Gur and Dungi, etc.,
who lived about 1000 years later, must hereafter be reckoned as members of the second
dynasty of Ur.* The relation of this dynasty to Edingiranagin is shrouded in absolute
mystery. It is not impossible that its members ruled before him and were Semites
who overthrew the dynasty of Lugalzaggisi.
How long the restored Sumerian influence lasted we do not know. Apparently
the Semites were soon again in possession of the whole country. The old name
Kevgl continued to live as an ideogram in the titles of kings, but the name of Shumer,
by which Southern Babylonia was known to the later Semitic populations, was derived
from the city of Sugir or Sungir,^ which was the centre of the national uprising of
the South against the foreign invaders from Kish and IJaiTan. Sargon I finally
restored what had been lost against Edingiranagin. In his person and work we see
but a repetition of that which had happened under Lugalzaggisi centuries before.
From the city of Agade," which became the capital of the Sargonic empire, I derive
Akkad, the name of Northern Babylonia. The names of Shumer and Akkad are
therefore but the historical reflex of the final struggle between the Sumerian and Sem-
itic races, and they were derived from the two cities which took the leading part
in it.^
^i. JXngirEn-lil. 2. Ivgal kur-kur(a)-ge. 3. Lvgal-kigub-ni-du-dura 4. ud dinffirEn-Ul-H 5. gu-zi manade a
6. nam-en 7. nam,-lugal{a)da 8. ma-na-daUibbaa 9. Unvg^tga 10. natn-en 11. mu-ag-ge 13. VrumM-ma 13. nam-
Ivgal 14. muog-ge 15. Lvgal-ki-gvbnidudune 1&. nam gal-yullada 17. dinffirEnlil Ivgal ki-a[ga-n% 18. nam-ti-
la-ni-altu 19. am'u-na-87ivb]. The use of da = s7m, "unlo, for," in Uiis tt-xt is interesting, cf. 1. 7 and 1. 16. We
meet the same use in No. Ill : 1. J>imrNin- din-dug ga 2. umanin 3. dam 4. ff. . . . . 8 f. e. Lvgalahir-ge 3. f.e.
nam-ti 1 f. e. dam- dvmu-nada amu-sJtub.
' "The king finished the place" = Sharru-mamazu-mhaklil.
' Or Lvgalsikisal, i. e., "The king is tlie builder of the terrace," Sharru ihapik-kisalli. From the close connec-
tion in which Lvgalkigubnidvdu. who left many frago-ents of vases in Nippur, stands with Lugal-ti-kiial on PL 37,
No. 88, 11 f. e.— 1, I am inclined to regard them as father and son. Cf. also No. 89.
*Cf. Hilprecht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, p. 67.
' Cf. already Amiaud in The Babylonian and Oriental Record I, pp. 120 S. On the readingof Sugir instead of Girsv,
cf. also Hommel, G<ichichte, pp. 290, 292, 296, etc., and Jensen, in Selirader's K. B. HI, part 1, pp. 11 f. (note).
'With Ueorge Smith, Amiaud, Hommel and others (against Lehmann, Sfiamashshumukin, p. 13). Th&l Agade
can go over into Akkad philologically, I can prove from other examples. But even if this was not the case, the clear
statement of George Smith (cf. Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 198) should be sufficient. I cannot admit the possibility of a
original mistake on the part of George Smith. Master in reading cuneiform tablets as he was, he could not have made
a blunder which would scarcely happen to a beginner in Assyriology.
'That Akkad became finally identical with "the Babylonian empire in its political totality and unity," was dem-
onstrated by Lehmann, I. c, pp. 71 S.
Xable ok Contents
And Description of Objects.
Part 11, Plates 36-70 and XVI-XXX.
Abbreviations.
angul., angular; beginn., beginning; c, circa; ca., cast; C. B. M., Catalogue of the Babylonian Museum,
University of Pennsylvania (prepared by the editor); cf., confer; col., column(s); Coll., Collection; <l., diameter;
Dyn., Dynasty; E., East(ern); f., following page; flf., follovring pages; f. e.,from (the) end; follow., following;
fr. or fragm., fragment(8), fragmentary; h,, height; horizont., horizontal; ibid., ibidem; inscr., inscription;
1. orli., line(s); m., meter; M, I. Q., Mus6e Imperial Ottoman; N., North(ern); Nippur I, II, III, etc., refers
to the corresponding numbers on Plate XV; No., Number; Nos., Numbers; Obv., Obverse; omit., omitted; orig.,
original (ly) ; p., page; pp., pages; perpead., perpendicular; Pho., Photograph; PL, Plate; re. or resp.,
respectively; Recueil, Recueil de travaux relalifs a la philologie et a rarcheologie figyptiennes et assyriennes, edited
by G. Maspero; restor., restored; Rev., Reverse; S., 8outh(ern); sq., squeeze; T., Temple of Bel; var., vari-
ants; vol., volume; W., West(ern); Z., Ziqqurratu; Z. A., Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, edited by C. Bezold.
Measurements are given in centimeters, length (height) X width X thickness. Whenever the object varies in
size, the largest measurement is given.
The numbers printed on the left, right and lower margins of Plates 30-42 refer to C. B. M. and denote the vase
fragments used in restoring the cuneiform texts here published. If more than one fragment is quoted, they are
arranged according to their relative importance. On fragments placed in parentheses, as a rule less tlian one or two
complete cuneiform characters are preserved. Fragments originally belonging to the same vase are connected by
+ or -|- X -{-, the former indicating that the breaks of fragments thus joined fit closely together, the latter that an
unknown piece is wanting between them.
I. Autograph Eeproductions.
Plate. Text. Date. DEscnrPTiON.
36 86 Lugal-kigub-nidudu. Fragm. of a large vase in serpentine, 20.5 X 9.45 X 2.8, orlg. d. c. 2-5.4.
Nippur III, beneath the rooms of T. on the S. E. side of Z., a
little above Ur-Ninib's pavement in the same stratum as has pro-
duced nearly all the fragments of the most ancient stone vases so
far excavated in Nuffar (approximately therefore the same place
as Pl. 1, No. 1). Inscr. 15 (orig. at least 30) li. C. B. M. 9825.
Portions of these 15 11. preserved on the follow. 21 other fragm.
of vases in calcite stalagmite (from which the text had been
restored before 9825 was found and examined): C. B. M. 9657 -f
9607 + 9609 (cf. PI. XVllI, Nos. 41-43), 9581+9643, 9608 + 9679
+9591 (belonging to the same vase as 9900, cf. PI. 37 and PI.
60
Plate. Text.
Date.
37 86
Lugal-kigub-nidudu.
38 87
Lugalzaggisi.
39
87
Lugalzaggisi.
40
87
Lugalzaggisi,
41
87
Lugalzaggisi.
42
87
Lugalzaggisi.
42
88
Lugal-kigub-[nidudu].
42
89
Lugal-kisalsi.
42 90 En-shagsag<?)-anna.
43 91 En-shagsagCO-anna.
OLD BABYLONIAN ISTSOEIPTIONS
Dkscriptios.
XVIII, No. 47), 9901, 9902, 9908, 9904 (cf. PI. 37), 9905, 9632 (be-
longing to the same vase as 9635 + 9620 + 9627 + 9606, cf. PI. 37),
9605 (cf. PI. XVIII, No. 44), 9599, 9633, 9680, 9703, 10001 (cf. PI.
XVIII, No. 48). Cf. also 9634 (cf. Pi. 37 and PI. XVIII, No. 46).
The same inscr. continued. On the scale of fr. 9325 restored from 16
fragm. of vases in white calcite stalagmite. Nippur III,
approximately same place as PI. 36. C. B. M. 10001 (cf. PI. 36
and PI. XVIII, No. 48), 9900 (cf. PI. XVIII, No. 47, belonging
to the same vase as 9608 + 9679 + 9591, cf. PI. 36), 9904 (cf. PI.
36), 9620 + 9627 + 9635 + 9606 (belonging to the same vase as
9632, cf. PI. 36), 9604, 9630, 9631, 9917 (red banded), 9639,9644.
Cf. also 9634 (cf. PI. 36 and PI. XVIII, No. 46), 9607 (cf. PI. 36
and PI. XVIII, No. 41), 9613 (cf. PI. XVIII, No. 40).
Five fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite (glued together),
16 X 13 X 1.9. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36,
No. 86. Inscr. 3 col., 13 + 17+8=3811. C. B. M. 9914 + 9910
+ 9916 + 9913 + 9320. Cf. PI. XIX, No. 49. On the basis of
these five fragm. the complete text published on Plates 38-42 has
been restored by the aid of the follow. 83 other fragm. belonging
to '63 different vases: C. B. M. 8614, 8615, 9300, G301, 9304, 9306,
9307 + X + 9668, 9308, 9309 + 9924 + 9311 + 9316 + 9314 + 9916,
9312 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 59), 9317, 9318 + 9645, 9583, 9584 + 9315,
9587, 9595, 9598,9601+9305, 9602, 9611 + X + 9610 (cf. PI. XIX,
Nos. 60, 51), 9619, 9624,9625,9628 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 53), 9638,
9642, 9646 + X +9310, 9651+9911, 9654, 9656 + 9685 (cf. PI. XIX,
No. 68), 9659 + 9660 + 9319, 9662 + 9665, 9663, 9666, 9667, 9670,
9671, 9673,9674,9683 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 60), 9687 (cf. PI. XIX,
No. 61), 9689, 9692 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 56), 9695 (cf. PI. XIX, No.
57), 9696 + 9637 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 52), 9697 + x + 9927, 9698, 9700
(cf. PI. XIX, No. 65), 9701, 9702, 9903, 9905, 9906, 9907, 9908, 9912
+ 9658, 9921 + 9313, 9922, 9923,9925 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 54), 9926,
9928, 9929.
The same, continued.
The same, continued.
The same, continued.
The same, continued.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 2 7 x 10 X 2. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 3 col., 1 +
3 + 2 = 61i. C. B. M. 9900.
Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite, probably stalagmite (glued
together), 4.85 x 4.9 x 2. Nippur III, approximately same place
as PI. l,.No. 1. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 9648 a and b. Cf. PI. 37,
No. 86, li. 7-5 f. e.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 5.8 x 7.8 x 1.8. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 5 li. C.
B. M. 9930.
Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite (glued together), 4.8
X 5.5 X 1.2. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36,
CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.
61
Plate. Text.
Date.
43 92 En-sliagsag(?)anna.
43 93 Ur-Shulpauddu.
43 94 Ur-Eulil.
43 95 Ur-Mama.
44 96 Aba-Enlil.
44 97 [Uryj-Enlil.
44 98 Same Period.
44 99 Same Period.
44 100 Same Period.
44 101 Same Period.
45 102 Time of Ur-Slmlpauddu.
45 103 Same Period.
Description.
No. 86. Inscr. 3 (orig. 5) li. C. B. M. 9963 + 9998. For tlie end
of tlie inscr. cf . PI. 43, No. 92.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 4.5 x 9 x 1.6. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 3 (orig. 5)
li. C. B. M. 9618. For the beginn. of the inscr. cf. PI. 43,
No. 91.
Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite (glued togetlier),
12.5 X 6 xl. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, So.
1. Inscr. 8 li. C. B. M. 9616 + 9931 (the former excavated 1890,
the latter 1893). Parts of li. 2-7 written also on C. B. M. 9622.
Votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone, round hole in tlie
centre, 2 groups of figures and an inscription incised; 20.6.x
19.3 X 2.6, d. of the hole 3.2. Nippur X, found out of place in
the loose earth along the S. W. side of the Shatt-en-Nil, c. i m.
below surface. Between the figures of the upper group 4 li. of
inscr., beginning on the right, the last 2 li. separated by a line.
Sq. Cf. PL XVI, No. 37.
Fragm. of a vase in brownish limestone with veins of white calcite,
6.8 X 6.9 X 1. Nippur III, approximately Siime place as PI. 1,
No. 1. Inscr. 4 (orig. probably 5) li. C. B. M. 96)2.
Two fragm. of an alabaster bowl (badly decomposed), 12.2 X 7.2 x
1.1. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr.
10 11. C. B. M. 9621+9617.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 5.1 X 3.3 x 1-4. Nippur
III, approximately same place as Pi. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 4 li. C.
B. M. 9932.
Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite (glued together),
8.4 X 6.9 X 1. Nippur HI, approximately same place as PI. 36,
No. 86. Inscr. 7 li, C. B. M. 9952 + 9699 (the former excavated
1893, the latter 1890).
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 9.7 X 6.3 X 1.6.
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr.
6 li., beginn. of each li. wanting. C. B. M. 9953.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 3.8 x 5.8 x 1.1.
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 2
li. C. B. M. 9636.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 4.2 X 4.5 x 0.5.
Nippur HI, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 3
li. C. B, M. 9686.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 8.5 x 9.5 x 2.7.
Nippur HI, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 7
li. C. B. M. 9614. Parts of 11. 1-4 written also on C. B. M. 9297
(dark brown sandstone), which apparently belongs to the same
vase as Pi. 45, No. 103 and PI. 46, No. 110.
Two fragm. of a vase in dark brown sandstone (glued together), 7.6
X4.3X 1.3. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36,
No. 86. Inscr. 5 li. C. B. M. 9954+ 9924. To the same vase be-
longs PI. 46, No. 110. Text supplemented by the follow, two
N03.
62
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
Plate. Text. Date
45 104 Same Period.
45 105 Same Period.
45 106 Same Period.
45 107 A patesi (V) of Sliirpurla.
46 108 A patesi of Kish.
46 109 A patesi of Kish.
46 110 Time of Ur-Sliulpauddu.
47 111 Time of Ur-Enlil.
47 112 Time of Ur-Sliulpauddu.
47 113 A little later.
47 114 Same Period.
48 115 Entemena.
48- 116 Entemena.
49 117 Entemena.
Dkscbiption. •
Fragm. of a vase in dark brown tufa (decomposed igneous rock), 7.4
X 7.3 X 1. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No.
86. Inscr. 7 li. C. B. M. 9951. Text supplemented by PI. 45,
Nos. 103, 105 and PI. 46, No. 110.
Fragm. of a vase in dark brown tufa, 5.4 X 4.9 X 0.8. Nippur III,
approximately same place as PI. 1,1^0. 1. Inscr.51i. C.B.M.9623.
- Text supplemented by PI. 45, Nos. 103, 104 and PI. 46, No. 110.
Two fragm. of a vase in bluish banded calcite stalagmite (glued
together), 4.4 x 6.1 X 0.8. Nippur III, approximately same place
as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 9682 + 9629.
Fragm. of a vase in grayish calcite stalagmite, 3.1 x 5 6 x 0.8.
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 2
li. G. B. M. 9597.
Fragm. of a vase in dark brown sandstone, 13.3 x 7.5 x 1.7. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 4 II. C. B.
M. 9572. To the same vase belongs the follow. No.
Two fragm. of the same vase (glued together), 13 x 14.5 x 1.7.
Nippur III, approximately same place as previous No. Inscr. 4
li. C. B. M. 9571 + 9577.
Three fragm. of a vase in dark brown sandstone (glued together),
16.7 X 11 X 1.5. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1,
No. 1. Inscr. 9 li. C. B. M. 9574 + 9575 + 9579. To the same
vase belongs PI. 45, No. 103. Text supplemented by PI. 45, Nos.
104, 105.
Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, orig. h. c. 14, d. at
the bottom c. 16.5. Fragm. 9302 : 9.5 X 8.9 X 1.9. Fragm. 9600:
8.2 X 11.8 X 1.9. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36,
No. 86. Inscr. (beginn. and end) 3 + 3 = 6 li. C. B M. 9302,
9t00.
Fragm. of a vase in bluish banded calcite stalagmite, inside black-
ened, 13.2 X 15.4 X 2.3, orig. d. 17.4. Nippur III, approximately
same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 8 X 4.5, 7 li. C. B. M. 9329.
Fragm. of a vase in brownish gray calcite stalagmite, 17.1 x 11x1.35,
orig. d. at the centre 17.3. Nippur III, approximately same
place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 10 X 3, 13 li. C. B. M. 9330.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 6.8 X 6.5 x 1.1. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 6 li. C. B.
M. 9655.
Two fragm. of a large vase in white calcite stalagmite, outside black-
ened, 13.4 X 14.8 X 3. Nippur III, approximately same place as
PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 2 col., 8+6 = 14 li. C. B. M. 9163 + 9690
(both excavated 1890). To the same vase belong the follow, two
Nos.
Fragm. of the same vase, 9.4 x 7.2 x 2.7. Nippur III, approximately
same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 2 col., 4 + 3 = 7 li. C. B. M.
9328 (excavated 1893).
Two. fragm. of the same vase, 7.1 X 9.9 X 2.6. Nippur III, approxi-
mately same place as previous No. Inscr. 2 col., 5 + 2 = 7 li. C.
B. M. 9919 + 9920 (both excavated 1893).
CHIEPLT FROM NIPPUR.
63
Plate. Text.
49 118
49 119
50 120
61 121
52 122
62 123
53 124
64 124
65 125
66 126
57 126
68 127
58 128
Date.
Dyn. of Kish.
Sargon I. (?)
Naram-Sin.
Ur-Gur.
Ur-Gur.
Dungi.
Dungi.
Dungi.
Ine-Sin.
Bur-Sin IL
Bur-Sin II.
GimU (Kat)-Sin.
Rim-Aku.
Description.
Fragm. of a vase in coarse-grained diorite, 12 x 12.2 x 1.6. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inser. 6 li. C.
B. M. 9918.
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 4.8 X 8.4 X 1. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 4 (orig.
6)li. C. B. M. 9331.
Fragm. of an inscribed bas-relief in basalt, 52.5 X 39.7 X 8.5. Diar.
hekir. Inscr. 19.1 X 18.4, 4 col., 2 -f 6 + 8+8 = 24 li. Ca. Orig.
M. I. O., Constantinople. Cf. PI. XXII, No. 64 ; also Scheil in
Eecueil XV, pp. 62-64, Maspero, ibid., pp. 65f. and The Dawn of
Civilization, pp. 601f., Hilprecht, Eecent Research in Bible Lands,
pp. 87-89.
Door socket in a black dense trachytic rock, 41 x 25 X 18. Nippur
III, ]2i m. below surface, underneath the W. corner of the S. E.
buttress of Z. Inscr. 19.7 X 7.5, 10 li. Sq.
Gray soapstone tablet, Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, 12 2 x 7.7 X 1.7.
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr.
6 ii. (identical with that on his bricks). C. B. M. 9932. Cf. I
R. 1, No. 9.
Dark gray soapstone tablet, Obv. flat. Rev. rounded, 8.3 X 5.6 x 1.6.
Nippur X, found out of place in the rubbish at. the foot of a
mound, c. 1 m. above the surface of the plain. Inscr. 6 (Obv.)
+ 2(Rev.)=81i. Sq.
Fragm. of a baked clay tablet, reddish brown with black spots, Obv.
flat, Rev. rounded, 20.1 X 18.5 X 4.3. Tello. Obv., 6 col. (23 +
30 + 35 + 22 + 22 + 25=) 157 11. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantino-
ple (Coll. Rifat Bey, No. 242), copied there 1894. PI. f of orig.
size.
The same, Rev., 6 col. (21 + 15 + 10 + 27 + 35+18 =) 126 li. Copied
in Constantinople 1894. PI. f of orig. size.
Two fragm. of a baked clay tablet, light brown (glued together), Obv.
flat. Rev. rounded, 12.8 X 6.1 X 2.8. Nippur X. Inscr. 19 (Obv.)
+ 22 (Rev.) =41 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied
there 1893. Cf. Hilprecht, Assyriaca, pp. 22f., Scheil, in Eecueil
XVII, pp. 37 f.
Baked clay tablet, reddish brown , Obv. flat. Rev. rounded, 20.5 X
19.9 X 3.8. Tello. Obv., 7 col. (parts of col. I-III, VI, VII
wanting, 32 + 19 + 32 + 31 + 31 + 30 + 21 =) 196 li. Orig. in M.
I. O., Constantinople (Coll. Rifat Bey, No. 256), copied there 1894.
PI. I of orig. size.
Tiie same. Rev., 7 col. (part of col. I wanting, 30 + 23 + 21 + 20 + 23
+ 15 + 10=) 142 li. Copied in Constantinople 1894. PI. f of
orig. size.
Fragm. of a clay tablet, slightly baked, dark brown, Obv. flat. Rev.
rounded, 7x5x2. Nippur X. Inscr. 9 (Obv.) + 4 (Rev.) = 13
li. C. B. M.
Fragm. of a baked clay phallus, light brown, h. 14 3, largest circum-
ference 14.7. Nippur X. Inscr. 17 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Con-
stantinople, copied there 1893.
64
OLD BABTLONrAN" ISTSOREPTIONS
60 130
60 131
Plate. Text. Date. Description.
59 129 Ammizaduga. Two fragm. of a clay tablet, slightly baked, brown, 11.6 X 10.8 x 3.2.
Nippur X. Obv., 8 col. of inscr., middle col. Suraerian in Old
Babylonian characters, first and third col. Semitic Babylonian in
Neo-Babylonian script, Rev. badly damaged, traces of second
and third col. The tablet was written c. 600 B.C. Orig. in M. I.
O., Constantinople.
Cassite Dyn. Fragm. of a slab in white marble with reddish veins, 24.5 X 21 x 6.7.
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr.
2 col., 6 + 5=11 li. Ca. (C. B. M. 979J). Oiig. in M. I. O.,
Constantinople.
c. 2500 B.C. Brown hematite weight, ellipsoidal and symmetrical, complete, weight
85.5 grams, length 7.3, d. 2.1. Nippur X (June, 1895). Inscr.
1.9 X 1.8, 3 li. (1. X shiklu 2. din hurdsi 8. dam-kar— "10
shekels, gold standard of merchants;" according to tliis standard
1 mana = 513 gr.). Sq., sent from the ruins.
60 132 Burnaburiash. Seal cylinder in white chalcedony, lengtli 3.4, d. 1.5. Babylonia,
place unknown. A bearded standing figure in a long robe, one
hand across the , breast, the other lifted. A border line at the
top. Inscr. 9 li. Impression on gulta pereha (In possession of
the editor). Orig. in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York. Cf. Hllprecht, Assyriaca, p. 93, note. Ward, Seal Cylin-
ders and other Oriental Seals (Handbook No. 12 of the Metropol.
Mus.), No. 391.
Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, 3 2 x 3. Nippur X, found in the loose
debris on the slope of a mound, and near to its summit (1895).
Inscr. 6 (Obv.) + 6 (Rev.) — 12 li. Pencil rubbing, sent from
the ruins.
Fragm. of an agate cameo, 3.95 X 1. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8,
No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied
there 1893.
Fragm. of an agate cameo, 2.8 x 1. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8,
No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied
there 1893.
Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 6.75x4.25x1.5.
Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 7 li. Orig. in M.
I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. To the same axe belongs
the follow. No.
Fragm. of the san.e axe, 4.2 X 3.6 x 1.1. Nippur III, same place as
PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople,
copied there 1893.
[Kadashman]-Turgu. Lapis lazuli disc, 2.75 x 0.3. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15,
Inscr. of 51i. (1. [A-na]«"iVM6fcu 2. be-lhslm 3. [Kadash-vtanl-
Turgu 4. a-[na 6a]-? [a-ft-s/Ow 5. {■[ki'i-ish') erased in order to
use the material. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there
1893.
<*1 139 Cassite Dyn. Agate cameo, hole bored parallel with the li., 2.4 X 1.65 X 0.8. Nip-
pur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15. Inscr. ^"sirEnlil. Oi-ig.
in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893.
60
61
61
61
61
61
133
134
185
136
137
138
Kurigalzu.
[Ku]rigalzu.
Kurigalzu.
[Nazi]-Maruttash.
Nazi-Maruttash.
CHIEFLY PROM NIPPUR.
65
PLiTE. Text. Date.
61 140 Cassite Dyn.
61 141 Cassite Dyn.
61 142 Cassite Dyn.
61 143 Cassite Dyn. (?)
62
62
63
64
144
145
146
147
Cassite Dyn.
Cassite Dyn.
Cassite Dyn.
c. 1400 B.C.
64 148 Marduk-shabikzerim.
65 149 Marduk-alie-irba.
Descriptiok.
Remnant of a lapis lazuli tablet the material of which had been used,
2.1 X 2.2. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li.
Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893.
Lapis lazuli disc, 1.2 X 0.15. Nippur III, same place as PL 8, No. 15.
Inscr. i>i"9irNin-Ul. Grig, in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied
there 1893.
Lapis lazuli disc, 1.2 x 0.15. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. ,
Inscr. DinffirEn-lil. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied
there 1893.
Fragm. of a light black stone tablet, 2.15 x 2.4 X 0.5. Nippur III,
same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Obv., meaning of characters un-
known. Rev., animal rampant. Probably used as a charm. Orig.
in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. Cf. Loftus,
Travels and Researches, p. 236f.
Unbaked clay tablet, dark brown, Obv., nearly flat, Rev., rounded,
6.15 X 4.75 X 1.8. Nippur X. Plan of an estate. Orig. in M. I.
O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. Cf. Scheil in Recueil
XVI, pp. 36f.
Fragm. of an unbaked clay tablet, dark brown, Obv. nearly flat.
Rev. rounded, 3.8X6X2.35. Nippur X. Plan of an estate.
C. B. M. 5135.
Six fragm. of a slightly baked clay tablet, brown (glued together)
Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, 16.5x10.5x3. Nippur X. Inscr.,
Obv., 4 col., 39 + 40 + 43 + 15= 137 li.. Rev. uninscribed. Orig.
in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1894.
Baked clay tablet, dark brown, nearly flat on both sides, upper left
corner wanting, 5.9 X 5.2 X 1.6. Tell el-Hesy (Palestine), found
by F. J. Bliss, at the N. E. quarter of City III, on May 14, 1892.
Inscr. 11 (Obv.) + 2 (lower edge) +11 (Rev.) + 1 (upper edge)
+ 1 (left edge) = 23 li., irregularly written. Orig. in M. I. O.,
Constantinople, copied there 1893. Cf. PI. XXIV, Nos. 66, 67 ;
also Bliss, A Mound of Many Cities, pp. 52-60 ; Sayce, in Bliss's
book, pp. 184-187, Scheil in Becueil XV, pp. 137f., Conder, The
Tell Aviarna Tablets, pp. 130-134 (worthless I).
Fragm. of a baked clay cylinder, barrel shaped, solid, light brown ;
h. of fragm. 7.98, orig. d. at the top c. 5.3, at the centre c. 7.8.
Place unknown. Inscr. 2 (orig. 4) col., 16+22 + 1 (margin)= 39
li. Orig. in possession of Dr. Talcott Williams, Philadelphia,
Pa. Cf. PI. XXIV, No. 68 ; also Jastrow, Jr., in Z. A. IV, pp.
301-325, VIII, pp. 214-219, Knudtzon, ibid., VI, pp. 163-165, Hil-
precht, ibid., VIII, pp. 116-120, and Part I of the present work,
p. 44, note 4.
Boundary stone in gi-ayish limestone, irregular, 48.5 X 24.5 X 18.
Babylonia, place unknown. Figures facing the right. Upper
section: Turtle (ou the top of the stone) ; scorpion, crescent, disc
of tlie sun, Venus (all in the first row below) ; 2 animal heads
with long necks (cf. V R. 57, sect. 4, fig. 1), bird on a post, object
similar to V R. 57, sect. 2, with an animal resting alongside (sim-
66
Plate. Text.
66
149
Marduk-ahe-irba.
67
149
Marduk-ahe-irba.
68
150
c. 1100 B.C.
70
151 Esarhaddon.
152 Nebuchadrezzar II.
OLB BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
Date. Debcbiption.
ilar to V R. 57, sect. 3, fig. 1), same object without animal (all
in the second row below) ; object similar to V R. 57, sect. 6, but
without animal (below the 2 animal heads). Lower section : A
seated figure, both hands lifted (cf. V R. 57, sect. 5, fig. 1), object
similar to V R. 57, sect. 6, last object, but reversed, large snake.
Inscr. 3 col., 22 + 23 + 11 = 56 li. Sq. Orig. in private posses-
sion, Constantinople. Cf. Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 33, Scheil in
Becueil XVI, pp. 32f. PI. f of orig. size.
The same, continued. PL | of orig. size.
The same, continued. PI. | of orig. size.
Upper part of a black boundary stone, 33 x 38 X 20. Nippur. Inscr.
2 col., 6 + 6 = 12 li. Ca. Orig. In the Royal Museums, Berlin.
Cf . PI. XXV, No. 69 ; also Verzeichniss der (in den Koniglichen
Museen zu Berlin bejindlichen) Vorderasiatischen AltertUmer und
Oipsahgiisse, p. 66, No. 213.
Fragm. of a baked brick, yellowish, partly covered with bitumen,
18.5 (fragm.) X 7.3 (fragm.) X 8 (orig.). Babylon. Inscr. (written
on the edge) 15 x 6, 11 li. C. B. M. 14.
Fragm. of a baked brick from the outer course of a column, 22.2
(fragm.) x 35 (orig.) X 9.2 (orig.)- Ahu Habba. Inscr. (writ-
ten on the outer surface) 33.6 x 8, 3 col., 8 + 8 + 8 = 24 li. Sq.
Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople.
II. Photograph (half-tone) Eeproductions.
XVI 37
Ur-Enlil.
XVI 38
Same Period.
XVII
Lugal-kigub-nidudu.
Votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone, figures and inscrip-
tion incised. Nippur. Upper section: A naked (uncircum-
cised) worshiper (Ur-Enlil) standing before a seated god and
offering a libation. Same group reversed on the left. Between
the figures 4 li. of inscr. Lower section : A goat and a sheep
followed by two men, one carrying a vessel on his head, the
other holding a stick in his right hand. Pho. taken from a sq.
Cf. PI. 43, No. 94.
Two fragm. of a votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone,
round hole in the centre, figures incised, 17.2 x 18.6 x 3, d. of
the hole 1 .7. Nippur III, found out of place, in the debris fill-
ing one of the rooms of T. to the S. W.'of Z., not far below
surface. Upper section : A naked worshiper standing before a
seated god and offering a libation. The god reversed on the
left. Lower section : A gazel walking by a bush (or nibbling
at it ?), a hunter about to draw liis bow at her. Orig. in M. I,
O., Constantinople. Pho. taken from a ca. (C. B. M. 4934).
Unhewn block of white calcite stalagmite, 29 X 21 X 19.5. Nip-
pur III, c. 10 m. below surface under the rooms of T. on the
S. E. side of Z. Inscr. 10.3 x 6, 4 (orig. 8 ?) li. C. B. M.
10050.
CHIEFLY PROM NIPPUE.
67
PxjiTE. Text.
XVIII 40-18
XX 62
XXI 63
XXII 64
- XXIII 65
XXIV 68
XXV 69
XXV 70
Date.
Lugal-kigub-nidudu.
XIX 49-61 Lugalzaggisi.
Al-usharshid.
Sargon I.
Naram-Sin.
Ur-Ninib.
XXIV 66, 67 c. 1400 B.C.
Marduk-shabik-zerim.
c. 1100 B.C.
Unknown.
Description.
Fragm. of vases in white calcite stalagmite, from which (together
with others) the text on Plates 36, 37 has been restored. Nip-
pur. C. B. M. 9613, 9607 -|- 9657 + 9609, 9605, 9634, 9900, 9608,
10001. Cf. Plates 36, 37, No. 86.
Fragm. of vases in white calclle stalagmite, from which (together
with others) the text on Plates 38-42 has been restored. Nippur.
C. B.M. 9914 + 9910 + 9915 + 9913 + 9320, 9611 + X +9610, 9696
+ 9637, 9628, 9925, 9700, 9692, 9695, 9685, 9312, 9683, 9687. Cf.
Plates 38-42, Ko. 87.
White marble vase, an inscribed portion (containing parts of li. 8,
9, 11-13 and the whole of li. 10) broken from its side. Nippur
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, 37, No. 86. Inscr. 20.6
X 5.6, 13 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople. Pho. taken
from a ca. (C. B. M. 9793). Cf. PL 4, No. 5 and PI. Ill, Nos.
4-12.
Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, yellowish, 23.5 (fragm.) X 18
(fragm.) X 8 (orig.). Nippur III, found out of place on the S.
E. side of Z., approximately at the same depth as PI. 36, No.
86. Inscr. (written) 3 li. (orig. 2 col., 6 li.). The character
Shar repeated on the upper left corner of inscribed surface.
Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople. Cf. PI. 3, No. 3.
Fragm. of an inscribed bas-relief in basalt. Diarbekir. A god
standing on the right, clad in a hairy garment, wearing a con-
ical head-dress. Hair arranged in a net, long pointed beard,
bracelets on both wrists, short staff C?) in each hand. Part of
hair, left upper arm and both legs wanting. Pho. taken from
a ca. (C. B. M. 9479). Cf. PI. 50, No. 120.
Brick of baked clay, light brown, broken, 31 X 15 X 7. Nippur
III, c. 10 m. below surface underneath the S. E. buttress of Z.
from a pavement constructed by Ur-Ninib. Inscr. (written)
22.4 X 10, 13 li., beginning at the bottom. Orig. in M. I. O.,
Constantinople. Cf. PI. 10, No. 18.
Tablet of baked clay, Obv. and Kev. Tell el-Hesy (Palestine).
Pho. taken from a ca. (in possession of the editor). Cf. PI. 64,
No. 147.
Fragm. of a baked clay cylinder, barrel shaped, solid, light brown.
Place unknown. Pho. taken from a ca. (C. B. M. 9553). Cf.
PI. 64, No. 148.
Upper part of a black boundary stone. Nippur. Upper section :
Disc of the sun, crescent, Venus. Lower section : 2 col. of
inscr. Pho. taken from a ca. (in possession of the editor). Cf .
PI. 68, No. 150.
Brown sandstone pebble (weighty), oblong, flat on both ends,
weight 1067 grams, 8.2 x 14.7 X 6. Nippur, on S. E. side of Z.,
'2i m. below surface. Meaning of characters inscribed on
convex surface not certain, possibly " f of a mine+ 15 " = 55
shekels (equal to c. 1054 grams,' if referring to the Babylonian
heavy silver mine [royal norm = 1146.1-1150.1 gr., according to
68
OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIKFLY PROM NIPPUR.
Plate Text.
Date.
XXVI 71 c. 350 B.C.
XXVII 72 At least 4000 B.C.
XXVIII 73 At least 4000 B.C.
XXIX 74 Ur-Gur.
XXX 75 1894 A.D.
Description.
Lehmann in Actes du huitieme congres international des orien-
talists, 1889, Semitic section B, p. 206]). C. B. M. 10049.
Bas-relief in baked clay, brown, upper comer and part of lower left
corner wanting, 14.3 x 17 x 3.7. Nippur III, approximately
same place as PI. XVI, No. 38. Man fighting a lion. Bearded
man with a conical head-dress and mass of locks falling over
his neck, clad in a short, tight, sleeveless, fringed coat, his left
knee resting on the ground. He is thrusting his sword into
the flank of a lion, at the same time in defense raising his left
arm against the lion's head. The lion, having received a wound
over his right foreleg, stands on his hind legs, clutching the
sides of his enemy with his fore paws and burying his teeth in
the man's left shoulder. Part of man's left foot and of lion's
tail and left hind leg wanting. On right side of plinth (0.6
deep) traces of five Aramaic letters, left side broken off. Orig.
in M.'J. O., Constantinople. Pho. taken from a ca. (C. B. M.
9477).
Terra-cotta vase with rope pattern, in upright position as found in
trench, an Arab on each side ; h. 63.5, d. at the top 53. Nippur
III, 6.49 m. below the E. foundation of Ur-Gur's Z.
Arch of baked brick, laid in clay mortar, h. 71, span 51, rise 33.
Bricks convex on one side, flat on the other. Front of arch
opened to let light pass through. Nippur III, at the orifice of
an open drain c. 7 m. below the E. corner of Ur-Gur's Z.
View taken from inside the drain.
N. W. fa9ade of the first stage of Ur-Gur's Z. A section of the
drain which surrounded Z. is seen at the bottom of the trench.
Nippur III.
General and distant view of the excavations at T., taken from an
immense heap of excavated earth to the E. of Z. Nippur III.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
PL 36
86
9657
"•" forms 1. 3 on
J 9903
9657. 9903
■'5'
>=*<=D<=iJ 3$^
lOOOI
; / 1. 1: 9657-9607.
1.2; ibid. (9903,990a).
'• 3: 9657 : 9607 « 9609.
9581,9903,(9901,9901,
9632)-
1.4: 960949607,9581,9903,
9632, (9902, 9608).
1-5: 9609+9607,9581+9643.
9632, (9902, 9608, 9905).
1. 6; 9609 + 9607, 9643,9608.
(9905)-
1. 7 : 9609-f 9607, 9643, 9608,
(9905. 9634)-
'■ 8 : 9643. 9608, 9605, (96S0,
9607).
1. 9: ibid., (9633, 9599,
9680, 9703).
1. 10 : 9643, 9679, 9605,
(9633. 9599. 9680, 9703).
1. II : 9591-9679, 9605, (9633,
9599. 9680).
1. 12 : ibid.
1' 13; 9591. 9605. loooi,
^96331.
1. 14: 9591. loOOI, (9605,9633,
9904)-
1. 15: lOOOI, 9591, 9904,
(9633)
A'ote .'•//. 7: The Hcrihe forgot to erase two lities drawn by laUtake.
L. llf.: Ertiitiire of uv-xa.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe,, N. S. XVIII, a.
PL 37
86
('o'lifinaed
'5
9904
9900
9 f. e.
8 f. e.
7 f. e. —•
C:i^9635
9627
9627
6 i. e. ^..^
9630
9630
Several Uneii mtidiiiy.
10 f e.
^^^ 3.} ^k
i-Mi^H
1. 16-17: loooi; for
1. 16 cf. also 9900,
9904.
1. II f. e. : 9635.
10 f. e. : 9635 .9620.
9 f. e. 9620, (9635).
f. e. : 9620 f 9627
+9635+9606.
7 f. e. 9606, 9627,
(9604).
6 f. e. : 9606. 9630,
9627, (9604).
5 f. C. : 9604, (9630,
9631, 9606,9917
9639)-
4-1 f. e. : 9604, bcginii.
of 1. 3- 1 restor. froui
9644, for I. 4 cf.
(9631. 9639. 9634.
9917)-
2 f. e. : (9917, 9639).
I f. e. : (9607).
Trans. Am. Phi
Soc, N. S. XVllI
n 38
87
Col. J.
9646 has 5 perpen-
dicular li.
' ^ 8614
X
Only 8615 has" this
oblique li.
8615
9674 has 3, 8614
has 4 aiigul. li.
5 "
"f=K*
9913
8614
9610
rrrmr
i
^^Mijr^ ^^< ^\
H 7 llll )
VoL I.
H
1^=^
* ^
^-F^
t
'3
•4
16
9692
/V-4+H9692
L 9642
7v 9906
9642
mw^<^
OT]
*^
76»
7.5
ft
,^0
;^.5
.90
*
1
^r;^
-fK?^
-ffAl
*
<>
"*P=h^
// «•■■■. 9654 hai
iS
9659
'y
T 9659
1^9658
99"
^i«
9628
f-
9628
*^g#> <f
w^
f!
^^ii>oA^
/v
9660,
9317
^
9660,
9317.
9300
• Omit. 0119317
9660
9660
•^
i'^.
9300
'/L 9300
NOTB. — The above text has been restored from the following fragments, COL. I, L. I ; frr. 8614, 9646, (9313,
9915,9611,9923). L. a: 8614, 8615,9646, 9921+9313, 9115+9913, 9611,(9674, 9923). L.3: 8614,8615,9913,9674,9662,
(9313)- L. 4 : 8614,8615, 9674, 9913, 9662, (9587). L. 5: 8614, 8615, 9674, 9913, (9662, 9587). L. 6: 8615, 9610, (9913,
9674, 9587). L. 7: 8615, 9610, (9587). L. 8-9: Ibidem. L. lo: (9692, 9642). L. 11 : 9696, (9692, 9642, 9689). L. la:
9696 t 9637. 9642, 9692. (9689). L. 13 : 9642, 9637, 9689, 9583, (9692, 9654, 9906). L. 14 : 9642, 9654, (9689, 9583, 9906,
9637)- L. 15 : 9642, 9654, 9318, 9583, 9906, (9689, 9656). L. 16: 9642, 9318, 9654, 9906, (9583, 9689, 9656, 9659+9319).
L. 17: 9318, 9642, 9654, 9906, (9912-9658, 9583, 9659 + 9319)' L. 18: 9318, 9642, [written on L. 17],
9906. (9912-i 9658, 9654^9659). L. 19: 9318, 9642, (9317, 9651, 99i2-f9658, 9702, 9659, 9906). L. ao: 9317, 9318, 9651,
(9642,9702,9906). L. 31:9317, 991149651, 9645, (9659). L. 23:9317,9911,9645, (9659, 9700). L. 33 : 9317, 9645, 9659,
(9628,9700). L. 34 : 9317, 9645, 9628, 9659. L. 35:9317, 9645, 9628, 9659+9660. L. a6 : 9317, 9660+9659, (9584, 9645,
9300. 93o»)- L. 27 : 9317, 9660, 9584 f 9315, 9301, (9300)- L. 28 : 9584 + 9315, 9660, 9317, 9301, (9300). L. 39 : 9584+9315,
9317. 9301. 9660, (9300, 9307). L. 30 : 9584+9315, 9301, 9317, 9660, 9307, 9300. L. 31 : 9301, 958449315, 9660, 9307,
9300. L. 33: 9301, 9300, (9307, 9315, 9907).
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8.
Fl. S9
87
Confhiued
Col. I.
p%^^mx^
35
9301, 9907 each
4 horizont. li
..V ,
PD 9695
•9304 has 3, 8614
has 4 aneul.
H.
9301
/" <
p-»»>
^
9646
f
V-'
9625
9646
4
9625
9304, resp. 9625
•III 9625, resp.
9304
( 'ol. JI.
<^ff=M-p^
^-tt-vgi>=t^
<>*r^
I
|^^|<|<^P
3^Hi^M»> "a
4^^hi)a=db
HI]^ <^ 11
^P^
=1// — N>^ Nyt=ti^
^ <
Co/. //.
•{0
^-5
<>F=^> f=t>
io
F<I>3iH||>^||
4
l{ CTJ <^
'■^■» Same varr. as li. 40.
^/IIinD.,'ffl 9.Vo.re.962S
^1^ -HIH
ii Rfd <3
<|-^ z^-^-^-
^g^^ p°t>
-0.3;^ 4>
^ < i
resp. 9921, resp. 9915'
[p^--^ 9915, 9921
9921, re. 9015
re. 9667. re. 9662
I 9665, 99!5^ 991"
^r \ ^1 9662, re. 9619
/ 'I
9903
=11. Hj. 3!i 9913.
resp. 9673, resp. 9921
P 9913 'P=»9903,
"on 91 13 the last
sign omitte<l
^ 93 JS
^ * 9913. re.
9598.
9313
//x
■|-9598> I! 9313. 9913.
■ r yi 9642
A 1 9683, re.
7 Vl Q 9642
'7,.
9905
Varr. on follow, plate
L- 33 : 9907. 9301. 8614, 9300, (9306). L. 34 : 9301, 8614, 990I7, (9306). L. 35 : 9301, 8614, 9907, 9306. L. 36 : 9301, 8614
£col. II begins], 9306, {9907, 9695). L. 37 : 8614, 9301, 9306, (9695, 9304). L. 38: 8614, 9301, 9304, 9306, (9695, 9646).
L. 39: 8614, 9304, 9646, 9625, 9306, (9595, 9695, 9638). L. 40: 8614, 9304, 9646, 9625, 9638, 9306, (9695, 9914). L. 41 :
8614, 9304, 9646 [col. I ends], 9625, 9306, (9914, 9638, 9695). L. 42: 9304, 8614, 9619, 9625, 9306 [col. I ends], 9310 [col.
II begins], (9914, 9921)- L- 43- 9619, 9304. 9662, 9701, (9921. 99M^ 991°. 93io)- L. 44: 9619, 9662+9665, 9915 + 99 10,
9921,9701,(9922). L. 45: 9619,991519910,9662-9665,9921,(9667,9922)- L. 46: 9921,9619,9915,9667,(9908,9665,
9922, 9318, 9662). COL. II, L. 1: 9913, 9921, 9667, 9903, (9318, 9662). L. 2: 9921 9313, 9667, 9913, 9903, 9673, (9318).
L. 3: 9921, 9667, 9913, 9903, 9673, 9658, (9318). L. 4 : 9913, 9313 [col. II begins], 9658, 9903, 9673, (9667). L. 5: 9913,
9313. 9658, 9903. (9673. 9667)- L. 6: 9913, 9313, 9658, 9642, (9903. 9645)- L. 7: 9313, 9642, (9611, 9913, 9598). L. 8:
9313, 9611, 9642, (9598, 9913, 9683). L. 9: 9611 [col. II begins], 9642, 9905, (9683, 9598, 9313). L. 10: 9611, 9642, (9683,
9905,9598,8615,9674). L. 11: 9611, 9642, 9683, (9905, 9674, 8615). L. 12: 961 1, 9642, (9905, 9683, 9674, 8615). L. 13:
9611, 9687, (9642, 9674, 9683, 9905). L. 14 : 9905, 9687, (9611, 9671). L. 15: 9305 [col. II begins], (9905, 9671, 9687.
9624). L. rt: 9305, 9624, (9671, 9905). L. 17: 9624, 9610, 9305, (9300).
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
PI. 40
14 *.
Chi. II.
9611,9671
^^ between ML
and Ni on 9905
El!
n X
18
\
f9
9305
9305,
9610
9305
V ^ I 930s
II 9300
9685
^3>
■»> 9651
9319 ' I
^7,
9319
• 9300 has five,
9319 six angul. li.
9307
^r^Ks^
87
Coidinned
Col. IT.
i
||<^P1
^:
S5
H 20
X. jX
^
^
i=ci <# i^»»
<^^ 1}
A^PiC#s|
=t>(^F=r<l=<*i
•40
35
45
■iO
Vol. in.
Ft] ^^=C^^
"X !
^
r^ 31
1=1
^ ^
^ #^^
i*.'
*
^n/^h^
^ fO
#lSnF<I^3l
/gp^i;R?=i
Pf^ »»^f-y^'|
^ * ^
f=i<c> * i
^/=ti
-^P.
i'.
^^<^
9319
32
»/
UV^ 9^'9
Ml 9317. 9319
^ j^ 9319
9654, 9659. 9317
^^' 9319 lias seven,
9314 eight perpend, li.
II 9659
*g>=| 9659+
-Tfa^ 9319
v^ 9319
>
1 9660+
3S:
39r
93 '9. cf.
^ . 8614, 9665
^p>\ 9312
'1^8614
Same varr. as 1. 34
'text and margin)
9665
93'2
40,
9922
HBlBil
l^/.?3i4, re. 9650, re. 9625
Varr. on follow, pi.
L. 18: 9610, 9624, 9300, 9365,(9668). L. 19: 9610, 9300 [includes the first three characters pf ly. 20], 9305, (9624).
L. 20 : 9610, 9300, 9305, (9651, 9308, 9685, 9668). L. 21 : 9610, 9651, 9300, 9685, (9305, 9668, 9308). L. 32 : 9300, 9651,
9610, 9656, (9319, 9305, 9308). L. 23 : 9300, 9319, 9656, (9651, 9610). L. 24 : 9300, 9319, 9656, 9925). L. 25 : 9300,
9319. (9309. 93'5. 9925)- L- a6 : 9300. 9319, 9315, (9309. 9925)- L. 27 : 9319, 9300, 9315, (9309, 9925). L. 28: 9319,
93'5. (9307. 9309. 9300. 9317)- L. 29 : 9319, 9307, 9315, (9317, 9309). L. 30 : 9319, 9307, (9315, 9317. 9309). L. 31 :
9659+9319. 9307. (9317. 9315. 9309. 9654)- L. 32 : 9307, 9659+9319, 9317, 9654. L. 33 : 9307, 9659+ 93«9. 9654. 93«7.
(9907. 9314)- L. 34 : 9307, 9659+9319. 9654. 9907. (93^7. 9314)- L. 35 : 9307, 9659+9319, 9654, 9907, 9314, (9317, 9663).
L. 36: 9659+9319. 9307. 8614, 9654, 9907, 9314, (9663, 9317). L. 37: 9307, 9660+9659-^9319, 8614, 9665, 9314, 9312,
(9654, 9663). L. 38: 9307, 8614, 9660+9319, 9665, 9314, 9312, (9914, 9663, 9667). L. 39: 8614, 9665, 9307, 9660+9319,
9914, 9314, 9312, (9922, 9667, 9625). L. 40 : 8614 [col. Ill begins], 9665, 9914, 9307, 9625, 9660, 9314, (9922, 9667). U 41 :
9914, 8614, 9660, 9665, 9314, (9625, 9922, 9307). L. 42 : 99i4-r932o, 8614, 9314+9316, (9660, 9665, 9922). L. 43 : 99I4+
93»o, 8614, 9314+ 9316, (9646 +x-r 9310, 9922, 9673). L. 44 : 9910+9914+ 9320, 8614, 9314-f 9316, (9310 [col. Ill begins],
9673,9922). L. 45: 9915-1991049320, 8614, 9316, (9310). L. 46: 9915 + 99Io^ 9320, 8614, 9316, (9310,9928). Col. Ill,
L» 1 : 9913-f 9320, 9928, 9316, (9903, 8614). L. a : 9913^ 9320, 9903, 9916 : 9316, (9928).
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3.
PJ. 41
87
CoiUiniied
III.
9310, resp. 9673
9310, resp. 8614
2 , 9316
I n 99'6-t
'~~T_j93i6,9903
■^'^ 9913
,„ ]^h>- 9928
' ^^ W 9619
)l ^(9697
^■5 » 3 perpend, li. on
9651
w- "0^9651
*;:¥
P^^^<7^^qs
*i!
— 'so^fco
-^^^
fF^K-^cmt>
15
'20
w^<-<^
V^H
ff mm^ <>
;< * ^ ™i
gW^g
^^bS#^SiJ
■JO
Ng>^-# ^
w^-^^
mil \
#>IJ
^h«Tili'i
. 9668
/Kj,
9929
^O'^rcsp.
"(ULL_ "^71,
ipC^resp. 07O
K^K, 9670
j p^ I C^ resp. 9670
■^ 9924
9924
^7
28
^9
.<^
9305
9624
31^96.4
mn
3 'T
-^ 1 9601
9309, resp. 9319
psdT[> 9601. 93«9
3',
Varr. on follow, pi.
L. 3 : 9916I9316, 9903, (9913, 9928). L. 4 : 9903, 9913, (9928, 9926, 9916). L. 5 : 9903, 9926, (9928, 9913, 9304). L. 6 :
9903. 9928. (9926, 9913, 9304). L. 7 : 9903, (9928, 9304, 9926). L. 8 : (9304, 9903, 9928). L. 9 : (9304, 9619). L. 10 :
9304, (9308, 9619, 9313). L. II : 9308, (9697, 9619, 9313). L. la: 9308, 9697, (9313, 9619). L. 13 : 9308. L. 14 : 9308.
L. 15: 9308, 9651, (9668). L. 16: 9308, 9651, (9698). L. 17: 9308, (9668, 9924). L. 18: 9308, (9929, 9927, 9668, 9924).
L. 19 : 9308, 9929, (9666, 9927, 9924). L. ao : 9666, 9929, 9308, (9927, 9924). L. ai : 9666, 9670, (9924, 9927, 9671, 9929).
L. 33: 9666, 9670, (9671, 9924). L. 33 : 9666, 9670, (9671, 9924). L. 34: 9666, 9670, (9671, 9924). L. 35: (9666,
9671, 9670, 9305. 9924). L. 36 : 9305, (9309+9924, 9624). L. 37 : 9309+9924, 9305 [col. II ends], ^9624, 9610). L. a8 :
9601. 9309+x-f 9924, 9624, (9663, 9319, 9638, 9610). L. 39: 9319, 9309+X49924, 9601, 9663, (9665, 9624). L. 30:
9601, 9663, 9319, 9309, (9665). L. 31 : 9601, 9663, 9319, 9309, (9665, 9312, 9307). L. 33: 9601 + 9305, 9663, 9319, (9309+
9311, 9665, 9312, 9307). L. 33 : 9305, 9319, 93C9+9311, (9665, 9907, 9663).
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII,
PL 42
87
Cuntinioed
Jf:
h
Vol. TIL
9665, resp. 9319
3' > .
/////
m
9319
-^^
9601+9305
'it O *
C'o^. ///.
S5
fMfiH|=^:
i^
9665,
J. re- 9305.
40
ll^H^ ^
S-f.
9305
^J>96oT+9305
4Jy 9305
it 9663
X
9305
—^1—^ 930s
I 9305 ^1^9305 ~ ' LJJ9319 '~V^93".93i9 — ™ ^93'9 ^9311 ^V
:^r" 9t)02 I ^Tfhv 0305 -0^9602 n #9319 fj/^ 9602 7^ 93M493io-r93"
FaHoMfe eoiUinued.
35,
■^ 9319 >i S316+9311. 9602 'sl ^9319 H 9311 B*9(
11 9319, omitted on 9923 ' ' 93io. qii6. oiiq >^
9602
9602
9310, 9316, 9319
9320
L. 34 : 9305, 9319, 9311, (9665, 9307, 3614). L. 35 : 9305, 9319, 9316+9311, 8614 [col. Ill ends], (9602, 9307.) L. 36 :
9305,9314+931649311,9319,9602,(9307). L.37: 9305, 9602, 93i4+93i6+93ii,93J9, (9310, 9307). L.38: 9305,9602,
9319. 9310, 9314+93164^9311 + 9923. L. 39: 9305, 9602, 931649923, 9319, 9310, (9320J. L. 40: 9305, 9316+9923,
9602, 9310, 9320, 9319.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
n43
91
Niimberiti;/ of line* on the h<vn» of
No. 91.
94
■Mr K^a^a
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
PL 44
■o
§5
>o
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3,
PI. ^5
103
Mistake of acribt
" Oblique Hi.
^ mistake of
■•<enbt.
Read
na;
AftKi- a brmk of Heveral limn
PI. 46 No. 110 folhwH,
Cf. No-t. 104. and 10.5.
Nvmberimj of linen mi the bam of No. 10,3
Cf No. 105.
Erasure
of serihe.
Numbering of linen on tlie bonis of
N0.1. 103 and 10^.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3.
PI. 46
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
PL 47
?N
rrm
T
nnn
±
03
I
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVHI, 8.
PI. AH
^p
SS a:
W5
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVllI, a.
PI. 49
OS
?2
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIIl, 3.
P!. 50
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
Pi r,i.
121
^
^
i^^s<j<^
PNS^ ff
g=f^ B
B:
Lf'" fill >7 ^^Tcncr
70
I
^-
^<^
>
f-5 -0-
Trans Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8.
PL !>2.
Ohverae.
m
Reverge.
^^^frfHH^ f^^m
N§ ^
f' /ffl
'B=ja=>'B>
teO-^cg
i=r?
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII,
PL 5.i
•a,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII. 8.
PI. H
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
PL 55
I
3
t5
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N.
S. XVIII, 8.
PI. 56
126
Ohferse.
Col. I.
Vol IT.
Co/. Iff.
Col. IV.
Col V.
Col. VI Vol. VII.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3.
H. r>7
Col. VIJ.
Col. VI.
Col. I.
'Col. JV, 11, 12, 6, 19: Col. V, 8, 10, 20: Eiwiire of the scribe.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVllI, 3.
PL 58
127
Obverte.
Revene.
4
«>
«s
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
n ->9
I
I
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3.
PI. 60
130
133
Obverse.
132
133
Reverm.
WMm^
BHSiM-
^^ ^mtNii><yi
,^^m^^
Trans. Am. Phil Soe., N. S. XVIII, 8.
/v. 61
134
135
138
136
139
141
137
140
142
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc N. S. XVllI. 3.
Pl8i^
144
Obverse.
Reverse.
145
Obverse.
Reverse.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
Pi 68
146
Col. I.
Col. II. VM. III. Col. IV.
'Col III, 17: Mead "n^ the reM m erasure of the ncribe.
Col. Ill, 38: Head ■^~~ the rent it eiunnre of tlie iieribe.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe;, N. S. XVIII, 3.
PI. 64
00
«5
' — •«
«
>«
!f»
%
^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soo.. N. S. XVIII, 3.
PI 6r,
149
Col. I.
10
15
20
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVUI, 3.
n (jfy-
21
10
15
149
Col. I.
Col. J J.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, 8.
PL 67
149
(Joidimicd
Col. II.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8.
PI. 68
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8.
Pi 6'J
151
10
'L. 3 : Erasure of the scribe.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII
PL 70
^
5^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII
PL. XV!
YOTIYE TABLETS IN LIMESTONEj INCISED,
Nippur,'
rrans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIll, 3.
PL. XVIt
'■■ i"^-^
MARBLE BLOCK OP LUGALKICUBN ICUDU,
Nippur.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, 3.
PL. XVIII
to
^Kk
#
^
^
YASE FRAGMENTS OF LUGALKIGUBNIDUDU.
Nippur,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII. 9.
PL. XIX
yASE PKAGMENTS OP LUGALZAGGISI,
Nippur,
Trans. Am. Phil, goo., N. S. XVIII, 3.
PL. XX
62
VASE or ALUSMARSMID (URU-MU-USM),
Nippur.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 3.
PL. XXI
63
BRICK OF SARGON I.
Nippur,
*;
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVII
I, 3.
PL. XXII
It,., L .
\ ^
V
■■y " 'y*«f •*- 4- -
64
INSCRIBED BAS-RELIEF OP NARAM-SIN,
Diarbekir,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S.
XVIII, 3.
PL. XXIII
es
BRICK OP UK-NINIB— Nippur,
Inscription begins at bottom.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe.. N. S.
XVIII, 3.
PL. XXIV
66
67
68
66; 67, CLAY TABLET (OBVERSE AND REVERSE),-Tell el-Mesy.
68, Pragm, of a barrel-cylinder of Mordukshabikzerim,— Place unknown.
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XV
in, 3.
PL. XXV
70
69. Pragm, of a Boundary Stone,
Nippur,
70. Inscribed Pebble,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3.'
PL. XXVI
71
BAS-RELIEF IN CLAY WITH AN ARAMAIC INSCRIPTION,
Nippur,
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIU, 3.
PL. XXVII
TE,RRA COTTA VASE WITM ROPE TATTERN, C. 4000 B. C— Nippur.
Height, 63. S em.; diameter at the top, R3 cm.
I'oimd in an npriKlit position 5.49 m. ?)trlow the eaHtern foundation of I'r-Our's Zijfgiirrat, and 3.05 m. below a pavement
which consists entirely of Inirned !)ricks of .Sargon I and Narilm-Siu. It stood 7 in. sonth-cast from an altar, the top of
Wtiich wa« c. 2.40 m. higher than that of tlie vase.
^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3.
PL. xxvni
ARCH OF BURNED BRICK LAID IN CLAY MORTAR, C, 4000 B. C— Nippur,
71 cm. high, SI cm. span, SS cm. rise.
At the orifice ot atl ojjeii drain ]jnssiiijj inider the eastern corner of t'r-<litr's Ziggnrrat, c. 7 n». l)e!ow the foiitidation of the
Kame, antl 4. 57 ni. below a pavement which consists cntireiy of liarned bricks of argon 1 au4 NarAlU-Siu. View taken from
insi(]e the ilraiil. I'loiit of arch opened to let liglit pass tlivoujjli,
»ns. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 3.
PL. XXIX
NORTH-WESTERN FACADE Of TME FIRST STAGE OF Ur-GURS ZIGGURRAT.
Nipper,
.r' •N,
"^M
uT
^■'P:
t t^
Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3.
PL. XXX
7B
GENERAL VIEW OP TME EXCAVATIONS AT THE TEMPLE OP BEL,-SOUTM-EAST SIDE.
I, 6 (8), 7 (9)— Three stages of the Ziggurrat. i— East corner of Ur-Gur's Ziggurrat. 2— Excavated roo s on the south-
east side of the temple and separated from the latter by a street. 3— Causeway built by Ur-Gur, leading to the entrance of the
Ziggurrat. 4— Deep trench extending from the great wall of the temple enclosure tnthe facade of Ur-Gur's Ziggurrat. 5— Modern
building erected by Mr. Haynes in 1894, after an unsuccessful attempt by the Arabs to take his life.
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THJS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO UBRARY
