THE BABYLONIAN EXPEDITION - ETANA | ETANAetana.org/sites/default/files/coretexts/14881.pdfBabylonia, and Assyria.," hlrve led me to conclndc that the size and relative position of

THE BABYLONIAN EXPEDITION

TI-IE U.NIVERSITY O PENNSYLVANIA

SERIES A : CUNEIFORM TEXTS

EDITEU BY

H. V. HILPRECHq

VOLUME I PART I. PLATES 1-50

PHILADELPHIA

Reprint from the Transactions of the Amer. Philos. Society, N. S., Vol. XVII I , No. 7

D. hnaox PaaTnrDo~, PX~ISTEX AXD L I T I I ~ G I ~ ~ E E R

1893

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR

PART-I PLATES -1-35 A N D I-XV

, iJ 1" e' @'+ ,,I/'

BY 11: V. HILPRECHT, PH.D., Professor o j Assyrian am' C2rvnfor of the Dnbyio~rin~r .iZ,tsnn?i 2jz fjie UnIve~-li/y of Pennsj,ivnniiz

PHILADELPHIA

1893

P R E F A C E .

Tkrl? old l%~~byloni;cu Cuneiform Texts, which arc i~nblisl~ccl in t l ~ c f o l l o w i ~ ~ ~ l)agc% arc a part of the harvest gathered by the Esl~cdition sent out in the snlnmer of 1888, under the i~nslices of the University oC I'en~lsylvania, for tllc exploration of Babylonia. The Rev. Dr. John P. I.'etcrs, Professor of FIcl~rew ill the University of Pcnnsylvauin, was the I)il.cctor of the Eslicditiol~, wllilc the suhscribor, as the Assyriologist of the Ul~iversity, :~ccoml~nnicd it clnring t.11~ tirst yeitt. of its labors. As the history of the Expedition is to bc l~ublishcd by its l)i~.ctctor at an e:lrly date, 1 here ahskuin frorn giving i~tiy accollilt of its o~.igin, members, n~~clertalrings and results. I n the mea~ltimc for the student I have a1)j)cndecl to the I~itrocli~ction a

Bibliogral~hy of tllose contributions of its me1nbe1,s to various pcrioclicals which relate to its ~vorli.

Towards tlie elosc of the gear IS91 there arrircd at the Musculn of the Univer- sity sonle eight thousancl clay tablets, t,ogcthcr with scvc~,al hu~ldrcd fiilgnicnts ot' vases and other i~iscribcd objects in stone, which had bee11 disintcrrccl in N i p p ~ ~ r or NufYar.':: I \\-as ahlc at ollce to ljrocced with the work of elcaning and esamilling thcm. Three 111onths later 1 had obtained s gc~iersl idca. of thcir coi~telits and their age, and had catalogr~ed about a t l~ i rd of tliein. On the basis of :I rej)ort snbmitted to the l'~1b1ication Committee of the Expedition, of n-hicli Mr. Clarence 13. Clark is Chairman, a plaa was ci~rcfi~lly devised for maliing t l~csc cul~ciform i11scril)tioiis accessible to a wider circle of students, \\-it11 as much speed aucl nletl~od as 1)ossible. Wit11 this view the A ~ s g r i o l o ~ i s t s of Amelica i u ~ d Canada were invited to lc~ld their aid to the l~reparation of ail exte~isive \~or l i on tllc Exl)cdit io~~ and its rcsolts. A nnmhct of thcm !lave given nssul.:~nce of their ~ C : I ~ ~ I I C S S to do SO.

I n April, 1892, t l ~ c u~rcle~.signed was e~rtrustcd by t l ~ c Colnn~itlec witli the edit- ing of t l ~ e scric:s contait~ing the C~ltlcifo~.m Tests, and, at thc s:imc t i~nc, was rcclncsted

* This is lllc prcsi:nL ~lesigllation of tllc axtenaii,: ruins l,y tile .\fYci> t~.iI,cs, io ~vllosc tol.lriLary tlicy a1.u sitnatcil.

.lltl~ougli I rclic;,tcdl~- 1ii:~d the .Lri~l~s of liic ncigl~lrorl~a,?~l [~~.oitau<tc<: fix me tlie n:tlztc t l i e j give t o l i i e ancient

Nilq,ur, 1 nevel. 1le:rril f n ~ m tlieil. l i l~ s llle l~ronnucialion Xiliel., to mliicii L ~ y i ~ r r l nuil Li,ftus l i i~rc given currency

alllong dssyrialo~isls.

6 OLD HATIYLOKIAK TNSCRIPTIO~-s

to u~lclcrtalie at ollcc the iwel>aratiotl of the lirst volume of thesc texts. I t is esti- mated that thc series will extend to oight or l~ossibly ten vol~un~os. Their general l'lan and character :we wcll exl~l :~i~~( :d ill :I report siibmittcd to the ;\ rnerican I'llilo- sol~hicl~l Society by :I s11eci:tl comrnittec, of which Mr. 'l'alcott \Yilliams \V:LS the Chairman, at thc stntcd ~liceting of May 20, 1892.

1 take this opportnaity to aclino\vlcdgc the libcralily of tllc vc~tct.ahl(: Atnc~~ican Philosophical Society of Pl~iladclljlli:~, as sho~vn i n the promptness mith which it has 1111dcrta1rcn the p~~blicat ion of the present volume, by giving it :L place in its learned and val~iablc Transactions. I hope that in the f~1t~11.e tlie Socicty xvill coutini1c to evince its interest in malting such labors :~ccessiblc to tlie rel~nl~lic ol' letters, by cs- t t n d i ~ ~ g its sytn11atI1y and si~pport to the tlndertakitlg whose plan has 1)een described.

A word more must be said as to the manner in which it is intended to prepare the Cuneifbrm Texts for the use of the Assyriologist. For the sake of securing uniformity t l l ro~~ghoot the series, aild of avoitling :.d~at wo~ilil malie it exccssivcly costly, i t was necessary to ~cl~rocl l~cc the iirscril>tions by photograph froin copies n~ade by hand, rather than from the objects themselves. Bcsides, the editor some time ago reached the conclusion that thc method of direct photograplly is not a t all satis.- factory ill tlie casc of many itiscriptions. The best which has been dolie by that cxpensivc process is beyolrd claestion the ~vorl; cditcd by Er l~cs t de Sarzec and Lkon Helizcy nnder the allspices of the govcrlimcnt of France : Dr~cozccerle~s en Chc~ldt:e. I t 1Iossesscs unique merits. Bnt in s l~i tc of all the care that has heen taltcn to secru,c an exact t.ept.oc1uction of tlie inonrunc~lts, ally Assyriologist ~vho has mo~,kcd through such tcxts as arc fouuri on I'lates 33, 35 n11t1 41! xo. 1, will :lgt.ee mith nie that tlie decipher~ncrit, esl)cci:~lly of t,hc margins, mi~lies n veyy scvcrc detoand upon tllc eye- sight-a circnmstance which inaltos the pt.ornl)t and coml~rchcnsive use of the con- tents of this bcautifhl vvot.li sonletil~ics tliHic111t. After matore coi~sidcration, therc- forc, t l ~ e Committee fb111ld it most suit:~ble to rel~rodiice the Coneiform Texts Groin copies made by the hand, and to t,,nll)loy photog~.al>hs from the ol~jccts thcmselves only occasionally, to cnablc the Assyriologist to verify the copies anrl to perceive the archeological cha~.actcr of the inscribed objects.

Z'he first vol~une, wl~ose first part I 111111lisIi hcrcmith, contains only inscril)tions in old Bahyloliian which have l,ceii fonncl on v:lscs, door sockets, stone tablets, votive axes, briclis, st:rmps, c l a j cylindo~.~, and si~nil;~,r ol!jects of 21. ntonruncnt31 character. A s the most ol' the111 belong to that pcl.iod of 1:abylollinn Itistory of which our knowlodge is r c q clcfectivc, thc inost 1xti11st:~l;ing care has been applied to anto- graphically rc l>rod~~ci i~g thc originals with thc r~tmost faitlif~~lncss. The editor has kept in view, not only the mal<ing fresh and irnporta~lt materials accessible to

s t~~clents of Assyriology, but also the doing his part in placing Babylonian 1)aleography 011 a better foundation. F o r t,liis end c\rcry text has bee11 rcl)rodr~ced in its actual size and form-that is, so as to show all i l ~ c ljccnliaritics oS the scribes, not olily as to the dimensions, shape and position of every e h a ~ ~ c t c r and gro111) of S I L C I ~ , but a130 their distance from one another, as \vas so admirably clone by Sir IIenry lta~vlinson ant1 Etlwin Norris in the first volnn~c of Tlze Ci~~zeyorn~ . f i ~ s c r ~ ~ ~ t i o n s qj' Il'este~n Asirc. The investigations and collections I l~a\rc made since the ye:w 1883, and my Icc- tures regnlarly held since 1886 on "'l.'lie Develolnnent of C~uneiform Writing i n

Babylonia, and Assyria.," hlrve led me to conclndc that the size and relative position of individnal e~uneiform characters, and certain conlhi~lationii in \vl~ir?li they frccl~~cntly occor, have been a factor of importance in the derclopment of tlie stcrcotyped fhrn1.s of later date. Tile detailed proof of this I milst reserve for the 1)rescnt until more lugent matters havc been disl>osed ol: &kt ally rate, c a ~ t f ' ~ ~ l editions ol' tests, and a fiaithf111 rel~rodnction of the pecnliarities of the incliviclual Babylo~lian scribe, have heconlc a pressing necessity for the llrogress ol' ~issyriology, if we a1.e to attain in this field anything like the results w h i d ~ Enting lias achieved in other cl(,p:~rtnlents of Seinitic palcog~~al~lly, ;rncI which me so ilecessary in detc~,mi~iing the age of f'racy- a nientury and undated inseril~tions. I n spite of' the scantiness of' rel~resentative old Babylonii~n tcxts ol' which the Assyriologists could ninltc use, it wo111d not l~avc been possible for them to have ~1iKcred by 500,1000 or e\.en 2000 years as to the clate of inscriptions, if sncli tcxts had always been rel~rodnccd ea,t,efully for their use.

It is to be cxlxxted that the excavations still proceeding at 5ufYa.r \!-ill fi1111plg the completion of texts here given in f~.ngmcntary shape, and that several Iinds will make their way into various Eurol~ean and i\nle~.lcan ninseuins hy rcason of the thievishness of the Arabs employed in them, ~ v h o also iiiay C:LI.I.~ on excavations 011

their own i~cco~111t.::: For this reason I ha.ve fihown as exactly as possible the fracture of such fragments. It was thus that 1 myself, artcr the pri~lting had i~cgun, was enabled to recognize the eollncction of PI. 21, No. 41 and 'KO. 4(i, and bctwcen PI. 22, 1'0. 50, and PI. 26, Ko. 74.

Where I have shaded the inscri1)tion in my copy, it i s not mcXant to illdieate that the reading is to me unccrt:lin, bnt that it can be ~ccognized only in a sl>ecial light and by a practiced eye, loolting a t it fronl an cs11cei:~l a ~ ~ g l e . IIow necessary it was to malie an alrtog~aph copy of snch inscriptions may be seen by eo~nl)aring PI. 23, Xos. 56,57, and the direct l~hotog~~aphic rel)roduetion on P1.S. >\ rcsto~.ation of broken charilcters and lines I. havc avoided 011 princil)lc, even m1ic11 there \vns no doubt in my own mind as to what was missing. My t~,anslatio~is will show in due tinle what my ' Cf. Illy note in ZeitscIL).Vt fur. Assyiiologie, IV, 11. 282 sty. Sttyco, neeu~rls r,f f i r e l'iisi?, Vol. 111, 1111. r, note

3, xv.

8 OLD XAXYLOKIAAr IKSCRIPr~IOYS

understanding of sue11 passages is. For obvior~s reasons, I have given the characters in some inseril)tions only in ontline. O f ' t l ~ c plates which reproduce tlrc inscril~tion on the Abu Hahba slab I have avoided altogether maliing an :~ l~ togrup l~ copy, s i~icc I t l~ought this needless. This stone was fbrurd ill i l b u IIabba c1111.ing the excuv:ttioi~ undertal te~~ at the private expense of the Snltnn in 1889, and is now in the iml~erial M~ise r~m at Constantinople. Through the courtesy of IIis Excelle~xcy 1I:rmcly-Bey, a cast of it was fi~rnished to orir Expedition. U~~for t~ ina te ly this was brolicll in pieces in transportatior~, but it was restored by one of my stndents. I t is this cast that has been directly l~Iiotog~.al)hed for t l ~ c present p~iblicatioli. Some portions of its margin have ail indistinct~~css, whicl~ is faithfr~lly show~l by the pllotogral~liic re- production.

T o convey to scholars a clearer l~ ic t~ i rc of tlie ruins of PITippl~r, a i d to show the sites at mllich the several inscriptio~rs were found, a 111:1n of t l ~ c cscavntions of the first year is given. I n the Tablc of Contents the texts are described with reference to this I'lan, which has been prcl~arcd in accordance with the bas-relief of the rnins macle by Mr. Cha1.1es Mrlret in Paris ~uiidcr the snl~crvision of Mr. I'crcz IIastings Field, the architect of the Expeditio~i.

111 determining the mineralogic character of the several stones, I liave l ~ a d the assistance of my colleagues, Drs. G. A. ICocaig and E. Smitl~, of the Uni\.ersity of I'eansylvania, to whom I extend my thnnlis. , i s I was able to nccorn1)auy the

Expeditiorr only during the first year, I am greatly indebteti to my esteemed col- league, Dr. Peters, for mnch val~lablc informa,tion as to t l ~ c sites in which ol?jccts were found, and for sketches and copies of a series of objects and inscriptio~ls which he made during its second year. A s the a ~ ~ t i r l ~ ~ i t i e s disinterred arl,ivcd in this corm- try at 1o11g intervals, I found myself o l ~ l i ~ e d to l~roceed wit,h the help of casts, squeezes, electrotpl~es and Prof. Peters' noteboolis, in order not to delay ~lccdlessly the pablicntion of the Texts. This cil.c~imstance, howcvcr, prevented 111y (leterl~lin- ing a t the outset t l ~ e matcrinl of the whole voliinie, A t the opening of each new

box 1 for~nd my~e l f compelled to withd~,aw some pages and sul)stitntc others, 1111til the comme~~cen~eti t of the l ~ r i n t i n ~ , in October of last year, made fi~rther alteratio~is and a more systenlatic arrangement impossible. T l ~ e seco~id part of this volume, which will al>pear in about half a yew, will fnraish further inscriptions of l t i~~g . ; who are already represented in the first. Kor will it be llossible entirely to avoid

this defect of arrangement in other volumes, so long as the excavations a t ATip1)~~r contint~e to bring to light new i~iseriptions of tlie sallle rulers. If; howcrer, we

were to delay the publication of the inscriptions until the complete results of the systematic explorations of the rui~~-heaps a t Pr'ipptir were a t hand, it 17;ould have

CfIIERLY F R O X NIPPUII. 9

bcen necessary, according to rily careful calculation, to wait some twcnt,y years, sup- posing that. the excavations were pnslicd forward with a force of some h~ui~drcd Arab worltmen.

011 account of its iml~ortanec mltl its close coniiection with the class of Cas- site votivc inscriptions liere published? I have incloded the crlnciform text on the lapis Iazoli disc of I i ing IITaclash~na~r-l'r~~gro, which probably calile from Xippnr,:" and is iiow i n the Musenm of IIarvard University,? Cambridge, Mass. Prof. D. G. Lyon l t i ~ ~ d l y gave me leave to pi~blish this, i~nd ljlaced at my dis1,osal a ca,st of tlic disc, for which he has my warmest thun1;s.

The tra1iscril)tion of tlie names of kings in the Table of Co~rtclrts is the usnal one. 21 new ti.ansliteratio11 has l ~ e e i ~ sr~bstituted oiily where t11e1,e arc sufficient grounds for departing from tli:it forine1.1y r~secl. T11c texts ill t l ~ c mail1 have been arranged chronologically, in the order of the Bubylonian dynasties; yet where the better ~~tilizatioii of sljacc seemed to justify this, and also, i ts already said, because it was impossible to obtain at the outset all tlie matc~ial of tlic piesent volume, I havc departed from that order in ZI few insta~~ccs. Nor liavc 1 :~ttcml~ted to distin- guish between the iiiscriptioiis of' I < u r i g t l z ~ ~ 1 aud 11, simply bccausc, with the material now ; t t our disposal, it is not lmssihle to do so with any certainty.

Threc other volumes of cruneiform texts are in l~reparation. The transcription and translation of the iiisc~~il~tions liere given arc :rs good as cotnljlctcd, and will allpear at an early clate. From this translation I have excludccl tlic A b t ~ Ilabha slab and the two Yolcha tablets (l'latcs 1'1-lTII I ) . These latter arc to ljc t~.eatcd in coi~nection with other tablets of similar character ant1 coi~tents. .I tr:tllsl:rtion of t l ~ c former I propose to publish separately ill the coursc of iiext sntnmer, in c o i i l ~ e ~ ~ t i o n with my esteemed colleague, Dr. P. Jensen, Professor ill llie Uni\~ersity ol'illarbnrg.

In conclusion, it is hut just that I shonld expl.ess lierc pitblicly my profo~uid gratitude to Dr. William Pepl>ei., I'rovost oftlie Uuiversity of I'ennsylvaiiia, hIcssrs. Clarence H. Clarli, E. W. Clarli, W. W. Frazicr, Charles C. Harrison, Prof. Dr. Horace Jaync, I'rof. Al1e11 Narqua~id, Jos. U. Potts, Rev. Dr. H. Clay Trrlmboll, Talcott Williams, Ilichard TVood, Stuart Wood, and to all thc othergcntlcmcn whose lively interest in the liistory and civilization of allcieiit Babylonia, and \\-hose liberal and constant sulpport, have made 11ossible the thorang11 researches a t one of' the ~ilost ancient ruins of the world. $ That the priblicatioll of this first part of the results

' Cf. llilprecllt, "Die VotivInscIrrift eioes nicht erktllilltell I<assitt:nliBnigs," Z 11. VII, p. 318.

i Cf. I,you, "On n 1,npis 1,:~zoii Disc" ill tlic l'ioecoilii~gs of the A,i~ei.C.a,~ O~.ie ,~tnl Sociatg, ?.lay, lSSD, pp. cxxsiv-uii.

++ Cf Pincl~es, Ilccol'ds of the P<ust ', Val. VI, 11. 109, 1. ti. (The Kou-Semitic Version of tllc Creation Story).

obtained by the ,Imcric;Ln Exl~ecli t io~~ docs not take place until nearly four ycars after it was begnu, is dac to tllc cxtraorcli~lary diflienlties i t cnco~ultered, on both sea snll land, t l~ rong l~ shipw~.cck near Snmos, throngh the hostility of Arab tribes, through the bnrning and pl~urdc~~ing of onr camp, through the outbrcalc of malignant cholera ill Uabylo~lia, throogh the rlcluy of the antiquitics on their way to L\mcrica, and through the serere illness iYom which nearly all the mcmllcrs suiFcrcd. Often it set.mecl as though tllc gl.ewsome cnric oS 1ii11g S a r g o ~ ~ 1, olle of the oldcsl monuments of Semitic speech published in tlie fbllowing pages, lrad i.cstcd on tho hmcricml Expe- dition, as that of the Pha:nicia~~ Itillg Es lnn~u~azar rcstcd 011 Napoleon : '' Whosocvcr 1,cnioves this i~lsc~,ibed stone, his f'onndatio~~ nlay BPI and Shaniash and Xin11:l tear ul), and extermillate his seed!" \Vc trust, ho11-cvcr, that the r:~,gc ol' Enlil, 1ot.d of' the dctnol~s, who set loose against the Exped i t io~~ :dl tllc igigi ancl i l l l l ~ ~ ~ n a k i , will ab:rtc with the l~ublicatio~l of these cu~~eiforrn inscril~tions, almost every onc of which pro- claims the glory of the great Bzl, " lord ol'thc lands," and that tlre crlrse of nearly six thousand ycars ago will be transfot.mcd into the ltindly blessing- which I i ing N a ~ i - Maruttasli utters in his poetic prayer:

to licar liis prayct', to gl.ant liis snpplicatiou,

to accopl his sigh,

to preserve liis life,

lo lcugtheu his ~1;lys. (1'1, 27, S,,. 7s . )

INTRODUCTION.

THE c~ineiforlli tablet8 and stone inscriptions, csc2tv:~ted by the Expedition in Nippnr, embrace a period of abont 3350 ye:n.s-c. 3800 to c. 450' B. C. About one hundred and twenty Icings of Bt~bylon, U r and other cities nrc known to belong to this period of Babjlonian history. Forty-five of tlrcse, accoiding to our 1)resellt li~lowlcdge, have left personal iiiscril)tio~rs or cloc~unients dated according to their reigns in Kiljpur. Several of these rnlcrs, whose names were only 1):irtly l)rcecrvcd or other- wise obscure, or whose c l ~ r o ~ ~ o l o g y nncl d~untion of reign wc~.c doubtfill, 11:tvc been placed in new light by the American cxcnrations, while otl~crs call now for the first time be studied from their own inscriptions. Amolrg otl~cr 1)oints t.he following have been cstablishctl: Tlrc corl.ect reading of Ur-Xnib of Isin, inslead of G'nmil- T im 'b ' as heretofore; the proof of the cxiste~lcc or Icing lbil-Ain, or better, 31- Sin of UI*,:' already disco\,ered by George Smitll,' but not gcnel.ally ncccl~ted by Assyriologists ; the proper proniinciation of the nanic Kizi-Nhirtittusl,;' the correct trsnscription of the group lil-dash-mctn, instcad of thc liithc~to Ilii-CCTCL, in a series of Cassitc proper names;" the comyletioii of tllc i~nme of the twenty-seventh Icing in the Babylonian list b ' to S'lir~yasliulti-l)'~,z~~~ic~sl~, "Shanlasl~ is delivelanee), instend of the usual Xl~cr!jcishalti-B~~1~iris71, "(Kamrn?n is delivcvance) ; the eon~plction of t l ~ c Cas- site king [ . . . . . . iln-s7,u in 8. 2106, O h . 1. t),'" to Jlibeictshzc, a ~ r d the identity of' the latter with Uibe? the son of Sliag~slialti-Sh~iriaslr; the first inscril,tion of the

' Contract ditted in t h o reign of Icing hrtnserxcs I. h nunibcr of coins, abollt one llrutdreil term ciotta lx,wls

hearing Hebrew, Syriac nnd A~.nbic i>rscriptionz, : ~ u d rnnny otilcr r>l?jccts, wiiich lrclong tn tlle S i l>pur of tlle Ci~ristiiln

ern, are l ~ e r e excluded.

' IIilprecl~t, " Dic TTotiv-Inscllrift cines n ic l~t criraniiti:n l<;~ssitenkiinign" i n Z. A. VII, 17. 315, note 1.

:' IIiiprecl~t, "IiijliisIni-Sin vorl U r " in Z. A, VII, pp. ::4?-:14li. ' Trans. Sot. Bi6l. Amh. I, 1,. 41.

1~1il~~r~!cllt, 1. c., y ~ . :$lo. 811. Hilprecllt, 1. e., pp. 800, 314, 315.

Winckler, liiitersiicl~tii~gen r w r Alfo~~ieiiti~liselrm G?sel~iehle, p. 140, coi. ii, li.

"Iilprecht, "Die E~giinz~un!: iler Nameo zweicr I<;~ssitenkiinigv," Z. A , in p r i n t .

Cf. Winckler in 2. A. 11, y. 310, nnrl Unlers., 11. :30. '"Vinckler, U,tters., p. 182.

12 01~11 RABYI,ONIAN INSCRIL"PIONS

Icings Bctrnm*in-s7~~71~-u?t1r' a ~ i d his so11 iMili-f7hiLh7s;' and the dctcrminatioli of

the app~~oximatc duration of the rcigus of the Cassite kings Iiur.igaZzu, 1Vnzi- Maruttccsh, ctc., their succession and k i l~ . ; h ip with each o t l i e r . 111 a d d i t i o n , the following new kings have heen added by the E s p e d i t i o i l to those already l i n o w ~ l :

1. ~ l u s 7 t a ~ s 1 1 i c l ; 2. Brcr-Sin .T; 3. Qu~atle;" 4. ICatbnsh~~zco~-T~cr!ju ( I f i c c l n s h ~ ~ ~ c ~ n - 5 '81) ; 5. I c r - T i ( 1 ; 6. BI:l-~~~iCEi7~-rc~)lu.

Tatending to give in the near f t ~ t n r e the t,ranscription and translation of the i l l -

scriptioils here published, I co~lfi~ie inyself a t present to the followi~ig l~oints :

THE OLDEST SEMITIC KINGS OF BABYLONIA.

Of the cuneiform inscril~tions of the oldest Scrnitic kings of Babj~louia very few

have been discovered. Wincklcr recently pnl~lisl~cd them togctliel. in his illtbccby- ZolaiscT~e ICeilsch7.ifttezte, 11. 22:' Undoubtedly to this a~lcient l~eriocl belongs also the

i n s c ~ , i p t i o n " of the Iting of the country of Goti, i. e., " of t l l e coiultry mid people to t , h c

cast of the lower Zib, in the upper seetioil of the region t h r o n g 1 1 \vliich the Adlreln and the Dijkl?~ rivel.s flow." V a r i o ~ ~ s reas011s' coml~el mc to diffcr fro111 Wincliler's dc- t e r r n i ~ ~ a t i o i ~ as to the date of this inscril~tioii by :~bor~ t 2000 years, i. e., to transfer it from the t imc of A g n m (IVincliler, CJescl,ic7~te, 11. 82), about l(j00 13. C., baclc to the t ime of Sargon, about 3800 B. C.' Because of the very archaic form of the c~mci-

I IIitirerto reprosenled unly by a bo~undary stonc <lntcil in t l ~ c time of tlie kings RiunmXn.sl~um-iddin&, llatnm2n.

sllum-ucur and l l i l i -Shikhu. Cf. lielsor in 6Eitrhge zur Assyviolo!jie 11, pp. 157-20:1 (quotccl 1~erc:~flcr as 11. A . ) and

Peiser in Schrader's lieilhiscIi~if(1irILe Bifilioll~ek 111, Pa r t 1, pp. 154-163 (ijootcil 1,et.enftcr ns Ii. B.) ' Far the reasons for identifying the kiny of tire inscription PI. 29, KO. 8?, mitlr Xili-Si,ikllu, see below, p. 3G.

a Unless identical with Gandilsh, tlro first iiiug of tllc C ~ s s i t e dynasty. Cf, plr. 28-50.

' Cf. Wincklcr, in Scllrttiler's Ii. n. 111, Pa r t I , pp. 98-107.

Published by Winclrler, Z. A. ITT, p. 406.

" Dclilzsclr, Wo lay d m Pm"dies? 111,. 283-237. Cf. IIohttre, l'A.iie oeePlotliilc ,kiss les iiisi~iptiuiis ilssyriennes.

' Tile predominant use of tho nl.cIl;iic line-silnped clinr~rcters, their markocl agrceluont with n tiiiole scries of

cl~nracters on Plates 1 to 5, the Semitic speech, and its ~vllole pl>raseolr,gy, together xvitll tllc pccu1i:iiities to hc sccn in the sihilnnts, mllicll are thc saue in :lie tcxts of S:n.gon I from Nippur, tile f i~c t that l b o ll;ibb:~, where other texts ui'

the same lligll antiquity linve been disinterred, is the 1,l;ice i'f its discurery, the use of a " p e ~ f o ~ ~ a t c i l s toue" as votive

olrject for the inscription, itself a cllaracleristic of nucient times, tlrc mluernlogic cllnl.ncter of tile stone, and last o f

nll-just wha t Wincl<lcr (Z. A. IV, 1,. 40G) is disposecl to regard ;is proof of a later ot.igin-the notably s1~ol.p a n d

skillful carving of tlro inscription. This last proof is especinlly convincina, for it is n clinractesistic tmit of tllc oliicst

Semitic cuneiforln inscriptions carved in stone, tllnt they are enymveil witlr n beauty and n sll;lrpness whicll are

:~bsent from tilose nf iater date (cf. also IIonlmcl, Geschichte, p. 501).

I t will not be objected that the cluneifunn clinsacters, indeed, seem to ilidicnte n great antiquity, but that t hey

may very well he an imitation of tlre mwrk of an cnrlier period by x later king. This lms beconle a very favorite

mode of reasonii~g when tlllt date of an undated inscl.iption is to be determined from its writing (a. g., hminuii e t

~I(.clllneau, 12t61eau Co~npnr6, p. xiii stqq., I'inclies, IIelivnieic TI, 11. 57), nud servos to pradace a very cilnos of unccr-

tointy in the province of Babylonian paleography. I think it opportune In stnte llere tlmt I :un :lot nciluainterl wi th

form characters and of certain mutilatcd passages, this inscription of t,he I c i n g of Guti presents great difficulties, so that, to my lcnowledge, it has never hecn translated, and Winclclcr has come to the conclusion that it was con~poscd " : ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ a r e n t l y i n part in the native tongue " of the I c i n g of Gnti. TVincltler wonld not be entirely incorrect if lie nnderstood by this "native tongnc " ' the Semitic-Babylonia11 of the inscriptions of Sargon I, for the text is written in p11re Scmitic-Babylonian, and reads as follolvs: 1 Lrc-si(?)-rci(?)-rcb(?) 2. dcc-num' 3. SILC~T 4. GZL-ti-%'in 5-10. vacant 11. ~ ~ - z L ~ J L ( ? ) -mu 12. icldi~c. 13. shci dzi2)pu 14. s h d - n V 5 . u-su-za-kzc-lai 16. z i k i ~ S~LUWL-SZI

17. i-sn-dci-TZL 18. ""Cu-ti-iin 19. i'"Silzl~o. 20. ii 21. ""Xil~ 22. ishid-szs 23. li-sz~-l/cc 24. & 25. z&m-SIL 26. li-il-qtc-dcc 27. i, 28. ~,a1.~(1^12 cel7~at(-7~~ct)-~u 29. ci i-si-il; " L a s i -

rab (?), the mighty I c i n g of Guti, . . . . has made and presented (it). Whosoever removes this inscribed stone and writes (the rnentio~l of) his n:Lmc t he r eu l~o~~ , his

a solitary instance in wllicll siicli n n ililitatioll of tile older cuneiform cllaracters by a later 13itbyloni;is ruler has been

sllown witlk certninty. \ J r h ~ t is c o l l l t ~ ~ ~ n l y regardecl as sucll luay be traced to a lack of carefulness in examining the

single cl~nriicters of tlie inscriptions in question. Gande's cnrlc:~vor to imitate tile c1iaractor.s of earlicr Babylonian kings is to be judged entirely diffcrcntly (see belom). In Bdbylooia tall tinles t ~ a systems of writing-a hicrntic and a

demotic-existed side by side. The latter is tlie system usetl iu tlie nll;iirs of everyda)- life, &nil was sllbject to it con-

t i ~ ~ u o ~ ~ s pwcess o fc l~ange nnil deuelapment, \\71iicl~ rcsulterl at last in tlre stereotyped cuneifurm characters of the Nco- liabylonk~n and Pcrsinl~ contract tablets. \\'hat I lravo called the lricratic system of cuneiform writiiig rvss identicnl

wit11 tile demotic iu the earliost timcs ; but later was cunfinccl to religious lilcrntore (inciulliog seiii-cylinders) &nil formulsries originally bcarlllg a religious cl~alucter iboundnry stones, etc ). Bltltoagh, in tlle nature of things, it n-as

less subject to cl~ango than tile otlrcr, yet it dovelopoil distinctly diifkrent frlrrns of lnost cilaracters in the diifelsnt

periods of its history. In more or less dependence upon the lnaterial inscribed, tlie local trtiilition and the pecnliari-

tics of tilo inrliviclual scribe, tlle hieratic writing also passed tllro~igh a course of development, more litniteil in extent, but peculinr to itself. Wlrcn clue attelltion is given to tliese Facts in every case, tllere will be ;rn end to llic weltering

confusion uf cnrly not1 late texts, nnrl of tile critical lrclplessness ~ v h i e l ~ results from this, in tllc field of Uitbgloninn paleogl.iipBy.

' I t is true, indeed, tllut tlre question ns to wlletlrcr the enrliest inllabitants of Gnti spolio Seiilitic 1nngu:lge (cf.

EIommel, Cesehichte, PD. 270, 30i;, noto 2) ci~nnot be rcgi~rcleil as dofiuitely answered, if we maintaiil that the "pcrfo- rated stone" w;~s n gift of tile Icing of Guli to the temple ill Siplix~rn (cf. "Tile icing of Ch:~na," Trans. Soc. Ribl.

Arch. VIII, p. 35%). In this case the inscription ~ n i ~ l r t very well linl'o bee11 composcil in tllc Selllitic iiiulect used in

Sippara. I liold, home vet^, that the object was not :I gift of the king uf Guti to tile telnjlle rrf Silrlmr;~ (obsono the

absence of gud S1~arn:~sl~ :xnd the f i ~ s t position given to god Guti), but tllet it had been carl.ie~l olF as booty fro111 tlie land of Guti by one of tllc enrliest Babylonitin king?, in the sanie way as tho vase of NnlXm-Sin (iiamriili X r g n n ) and most of tho vases of Alusharsl~i~l (cf. PI. 4, 1. 11, 13 : t~iciisrniti Eli~rnti) xve1.e c.zrl.ie,l to l iabyloni~. From this it

certainly wo~ild result tlli~t, just like tile inliabit~nts of Llililbi (rf. Scllcil, li'eeiieil d o l'i.itna!Lx S I V , 1iz.r. 1 et 2, p. 104), so also tllose of Gutl spoke Semitic and rvorsl~iperl the Baby1oni;in gods Ninnn :mil Sill, along wjtll tlicir prin-

cipal nntioonl god Gutl. This last deity secnls to llave givou his niune t," their country, its did tho god dsllur to the

city ancl land of Ashnr (cf. also Ni(;r?)nna and Xinovell, etc.), and tho god Sl,iisliinak to the ciiy of Slrasllinak o r

Susa (cf. ITagen in D. A. 11, p. 233).

' Cf. Jensen, iu Scllmder's If. n. 111, P w t I, p. 11G, note 5.

"Wiklev oKors za. Apparently Illis rending results from an ovcrsigl~t citller ou the part of \J7inckler or of the

ancient scribe ; for cf. P1. 1, 13 ; PI. 2 (and I), 14.

14 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCHIPTIONS

fo~~ndation may Gnti, Ninna and Sin tear u p and exterminate liis seed, and may whatsoever he nndertakes not prosper ! " '

'ro the time of Sargon and Narkm-Sin "elongs also thc first of the two inscrip- tions of Ser-i-Po1 (8tr:le.s de ZohrFb), p~~hlished by 3fcss1.s. J. dc Xorgan and V. Scheil i l l Recueil de 2 i . nac tux ~elatifs ZCL P I 1 i l o l o ~ j i e et ,i l 'A~chdolo~/ie +ypk>nnes et assy~iennes XIV, Liv. 1, 2, 1892, 1111. 100-106. Both of these badly mntilatcd inscriptions arc written in a Sernitic"ialcct, and the phraseology is very similar to that of the king of Gnti. Scheil offere a transliteration and trni~slatioll of the preserved portions. In regard to the first inscril~tion I remark, howevcr, that col. I, 11: il DUB BA AM, can hardly he read (wi th Scheil) u d1~b6ana.'Tl1c preceding phrase, salmZtum uanltum, "these images," and the i ~ a i ~ a l l c l passage of the Guti text and 1'1. 1 a~ id 2 of the present v o l u m c - c l l q ) p r i shu'ci-rcqr~ire a dc~lionstrative 11ronoun in conncction with duppa. I therefore regard B A as the idcogr. fnr s7i?.~'att~;'

and rcad duppc~ s7 tu ' n t ccm( -am) , " this inscribed stonc." The secoiicl character in col. 11, 10, which Scheil docs not recognize (2. c., 11. 105) is il," and tlre line

I In the interpl.etation I ron~nrk the ful:awing : 1,. 2. &<-ILLOIL is not to be reg;,rclcd in<leponilcntly ns nu npposi.

live representing the usnnl shavvu dn~nzmi. (Stile de ZohRb I, col. 1, Z), bnt ltlust bc juinerl with shiw Quti,iz, as "tllo

lnigl~ly k i n s of Gnti." The posilion uf tire adjective bcfcne the subslnntive is not so mucll dne to llie emphasis of the ndjcctive (Uel. Gl'trm., $ 121) as to the endenvar to nvoiil sclinraling 1,Iie :~cljoctire from tho noun to wl~icll it belolrgs.

L. 14. 8 I ~ z ~ ' n (or ~hi~ziin) is the older form fiom mliicll aIu~ 'a t i~ , I.esp. s b ~ ' i l t f ~ , II~LS lieen ( l ~ r i r e d . Cf. Arabic I L U Z O ~ ,

Del. Qva~n. , 57, :tnd .Tiger, i n 4. A. I, p. 481 seq. L. 15. 17. t~snzi~kiiiii, isa!iiru :ire ,lot Itresent tonsei; of tllc

steins TI1,and I, respeclivcly (= z&tsuznhani, ilsa?nvu), bnt, in ronsi(1er:~lion r i f I. 20, are to bc regnlrled a s 111, ant1 I, :ushnzoklisi (Slile de Zoltrib I, lZ) = Z ( S ~ ~ Z Z ( L I L U I L ~ - ? C J I L C ~ E ( ( ~ U + , t i (Dcl. G~.<(~IL . , 70 ,5) llnd i~ha!01.1~. S6

hotween two vowels, or with an m follar~ing, was nliparontly yt'ono~uiccd 21s s (el: ;~1so W . 1 i ~ u d 2). Tile rout of

uaazaku is lil or ?;I, 11 1t. 30, 42, e , f (Jensen, Iiosmologie, 11. 350), not 3x3 (Scheil, 1. e., 11. 103). I t nlcans "to be in

motion, to rnove " (intr.). Cf. nnzilctu, I1 11. 23, OZ, e, S, synon. of rln!tu, "door " = " tililt wllicil inoves (on n l~inge);" iziulti rnu11i~t~llt~ (Creation Talllet IV, 101), "the spear ijuivel.ei1." 111, r "Lo m o w (traus.), to reo~ove." This

lnoaning is sopported hy p:~r:~llel pass;tges, as V R. 33, coi. VIII, 42 : mnn,iiL s6n iliibitiib (densen, in Scllm~ler 's If. B. , 111, Pirrt I, p. 152, note 3) sIu~?nislir~ di,nia shurni'n ishi~(i<r!a, " Wl~oovcr c;~rries OK (the tnlilel) nnd wl.itcs his nalrlo ns

my nilrnc." L. 16. Tho sign giui~-,linlcct. for MU-signifies appal~ently z i i~~i6 (Sai.:ul~ Cyl., 1. 50) . Cf. Jensen,

Z. A , I, p. 184. I,. 2 % . lisai,il= li.~ss!ri, n31. Cf. PI. 2, 20 (PI. 1, 21 : lissuh'i). For tho ir of [lie 3l1 1ioss. m;lsc.

plnr., cf. Del. G~nm., $ 00, c. L. 5 . li-il(sic !=Briil,now, 1. c. , 4847)-gv-dn . ~ x l i l i , . r i (R, cf. PI. 2, 23. 1'1. I , 24 rends in its glacc l i - i l g u ~ t u :zli!ku!li, n ~ 5 . Cf. Llte correri,onrling S~~ tnc r inn p I ~ l . ~ s c a t Lllc close of the inscril~tian of

Ec~daahman- l l ' r~~gt~ , PI. 24, 90. 03. IJ. L'H is uncertnin. Tlie secontl cllnrnctcr I regard ns I)I= i~lchir, niirl tire

thirtl ch;rractcr, Tat (Driinnuw, Lial, 2701), :L lilronetic com1,limcnt. i lctording lo tile scribc's ~nctllorl of ,\riling, we

should expect hut one ward ou this line. . 2 . a i s b . = G ishi,; Pr:ct. I , of 10.. CL 111 It. 01, Nu. 2, 14 : nl l~nt

,,ibilli 12 ishshi~., " the bllsille~s (Hnndel lend 1lTa7idel, Ilel.) of the land may not prosper."

"l'hus, correctly, Scheil, 1. c., p. 105. Tlre sccood is cunsiilerabli yourigel..

' Also the features of the Icing Asta-bai~ini of Lulobi, ctlrved togctller wilh tlrc inscription in tlle rock, ;ire m;~ni.

fcstly Somitic.

I Schcil tmnslates "cclte tnblelle," but i~clds "cettc" only fionl tile genersi contest. Perhaps it is to he read directly sli?~, and the two cll:lrnctcrs inust be tmnscribed as s?~uiim. Cf. also Amk~ud,

iu Z. A. 11, p. 202. Ko. 75 in Aminorl el Mdcl~ineau, Tableau comnpnr6, must be corrected nccordingly.

ClIiKFLY FROM NIPPITX. 15

reads li-il-kzl-tlu = I:lku!,1. The scconcl ir~seril)tion (st& tle C'l~ei/;l~-Kl~ri?~) is, in

iny estimation, misunderstood by Schcil. There is no tlucstion of "restoration," but of the first ercctioil of the image.

T o this, the already li~rowir inatc~ial to~~c l i ing the oldest Seniitic period, has come now to be added PI. 1-7. The above rcmarlts upon the tcsts of' the liiiigs of Guti and Lnllubi o l~en the way for a better understanding of tlicsc new tcsts. T l ~ c following notes sr~pply all that still llccds to be added.

The cxcavatiolls have brought to light six inscribed ol)jccts of Ssrgon 1 : two brick stamps of halted clay, the fi.ag~nent of a third, and t111.c~ (1001. soclrets. The I~ricl; stamps ' are made from tlie same moultl. Thc i1iscril)tion (PI. 3, No. 3) reads as follows: 1. ~ l ~ u ~ ~ - ~ ~ - r ~ i - s 7 ~ c ~ ~ - c i l i 2. sh,((~. 3. A-qii-tle!i 4. h : h i (BA-GIN) 5. h:t 6. "lLB61, "Sharg%oishar.:!li, icing of Agade, builder" of tlrc temple of BC1." Judging from their alq~earallcc, these briclc stamps werc never practically nsed, but werc prc- sentccl by Sargon as teml)le-offe~.i~~gs to B+l ill co~nmcmoratio~i of his worli ; 01. l3W-

haps they were placed in the corners of t,hc str~icturc erected by him, as was the case with the later clay cylinders.' That ot11cl.s ~vliich were of t11c same form as these were i~scd for starnping bricks can neither be l>rovccl nor denied.'

Of greater importance ale the door soclicts, which contain the longest inscril~tions of Sargon thus far ltnown. Two of these arc cxnctly alilie in t,heir contents (PI. 2). The inscription of' the thi~.cl (PI. 1) diEers somewhat. PI. '1, as the more important,

reads as follows : I. ' ~ ~ f l / i u ~ - g r i - ~ ~ i - , ~ h a r - ~ i l i 2. m ( i ~ Jtti(-tb)-i'8iBi?l 3. tln-num 4. shrtr 5. A-ga-dek". 2 7. su"-1;-lti-ti 8. "I"UI:Z 9. bi i~l i 10. z-L.u~' 11. bit i l ' l l l i2l 12. i r ~ N@~JU?'", ctc.," " Sharg2nisllar:Ii, son of Itti-BCl, the mighty lting of Agade 2~nd oftlie dominion(?) . . . . of BCI, builderorElia~,, tcml~le of BCl ill Nippnr." From this text. we losrll the interrsting fact that Sa~,goli's fathcr was Itti-BPI (" With-B?I").Viias-

' iivhziz ncxrcr signifies "to restot.c," but " to set ug ;" P,zr~,nic l i l b ~ ~ ~ ~ , its Scll~il ~ S ; L U S C I . ~ ~ C S , CUIII,I m v e r be ( G ~ ~ L L I I - mar ! ? ) the Babylonian or even Luluhitic ey i~ i rn lcn t for "alors (lo' elle tombnit."

' Tl~e cuneiforlil clinri~cters lmve been executed iin relief, an0 are larger at the iiase 1ll:~u ul the top. My copy gives the exsct size of tlle cllaractors at t l l ~ hasc, wllile the ~l lotr ,gn~pl~ic rcproduclion i!lust~.ates tile size a t tho top.

"cii~4 OBIIS IS to bllilcl ~on i e th ing or to build a1 s o m o t l l i n ~ that nlre;~dy existed, i, 8.. to add to it or to restore it i f i t \\.as in ruins. All tiiat we can say of Sargou is tll;it, ile W;LS ;L irnildcr of tile tonrple, but tiat ils first buildcr.

"One of tile cylinc1el.s i r o n l%ithylon, now in the I<l.itisll &fuseurn, was nut found, ;LS I was nblo to learn from tile

lnau ~v l lo <lisca\~orctl it, in a corner, but in a nichc in (Ile sidc of a long wall" (Peters).

V W i I ~ l c r ' s cloubts ((r'escl~., p. 26) iLre ilissiliateil by tlie evidence of the pllrnses b.iui b i t Ed1 and b h a i Xkh.lil. bit

Bi1 bi. A-ijipz~r (Plates 1-3).

" Briinnow, I. c.. YO2 (.Jenscn). The siguifici~nce of si6lafi (or l~lar . 8612ti2 ) is nu t certaiu. Is 7)ij (Jer. 33, 4) to be co~llparcd I

' This-not X-s6irv (T~elit~,scll, Cesch., 1,. 3::)-ir:ts 11rc nilm,: of tho tcnli,lc of U&l in Piil,i>~u.. Cf, denson, Ihs- ?i&oloyie, pp. 186 soy., 106 sey.

For the rest, cf. BD. 10. 13, 14 .

Perlraps sllorteuecl from Illi-B;l.bitlir(u, "Vitll 13il is l i ~ ~ ' ~ S l r ; ~ s s u i n i c r . X u b o i ~ . 4FF, 13 ; L7<n,zbgljs. 373, 10). Cf. the sillliliLr forllii~tions I t l i ~ J I L ~ r d ~ k (~IYIbf i , -SILO~IL(LSIL, . 02~10 , etc.)~balL(u in the Contract literature.

16 OLT) BABYLONIAN INSURIPTI3NS

much as the latter does not bear the title of i c i n g , we may' see therein a confirma- tion of the legcnd%f Sargon, I. 2, a-hi ul i-di ahi-ia i-ra-mi shcc-da-a, "my father I know not, wlicrea~ the brother of my father i n h t t b i t s the mo~~nta in ," viz., that Sargon, being of zn inferior birth on his f a t t i e r ' s side, was a usurper.

My nse of Slznrgrini-s11a~-cili as identical with S h . a r - g i - ? z u - l i ~ ~ o w ~ ~ from the in- scriptions of Nabfina'id as the father of Na~$rn-Sin-re(~r~i~.cs a word of cxl~laiiatio~~. S a y c e , " IIommel' and Tiele' have never called in question the identity of thc two irames, reading the name of' our kingas Sl~cw-ga-IZ~, and regarding shnl- (Pli as his first title. Simi1a1.l~ Pinches d i 3 t i n g o i s h e d between the name and the title, at first'' inter- preting the latter with Mbnant as lugnl-lai, " the messenger king," but after\vards7 with Hornmcl as shew rili, "k ing of the city." Mhnant %and Oppcrt, on the contrary,

believe that flha~-g~-ni-shcel.-l~ch (Mi.nant), or Sh.c~r(J~i1~)-gcl-1zi-s7iu~~-irnsi (Opl~ert!'), or S7~ur(IZr, Ili~z)-gcc-~zi-sl~rt~-ccli (Oppe~.t'~) is to be rcgarded as one word, contain- ing o~i ly the name of the king. More recently \Vincl;ler," adopting Oppert's view, mads the name Slcar-gc~-r~i-s7~nl-mclhrizi. He considers the identity of this name with

Sargon as an open question, whilst Oppert holds it to be f i i m p l y an i n r t d n z i s s i b l e

i z t i e . It is not clear t o me what induced Oppert to regard S/~ar-gu-?~'L' as

identical with .Bin-~CL-ni.'" The syllabic valoc of bin for the sign SHAR is nnproven, and in itself improbable." On the other hand, I share the view of Oppert-M6nant in

' This conclusion is very pl.obi~ble, bnt not absolutely certain, as the titlc of king is very freiluently ornittell mlien

the nsulus of tlio f ~ t h e r s of Cnssite kings arc referred to, althougl~ tlley ;arc lruawn to lmve been "%in:s."

'! Althougl~ evidently containing Iristory internwven wit11 legend, it is nevcl.theleus histurically impvrtsnt, as giving

expression to tile Babylonim conception of tile history of the ancient Snrgon. Itu value increases iu proportion as

ao find in it stato~nents wllicll are proven from other sources to be correct. Incidenttlly, it may be remar.ked tlii~t on

account of the mention of tlie fntlrer's brotllor in tho "Legend," nncl bccz~use of Sargou's own sl;ltoolont concorning

Itti-Bal, the clause obi a1 idi can only be reprded as trieaniog that Sargou dill not kuom his fatller personally, since tllc latter was dead (Tiele, 2. e . , p. 114), 01. for variuus re;Lsons w&s compollod to koep lliuiself in concealment.

W f . e . g . , R . p . I , 1 ~ . 5 ' 1. o., p. 503 8ep.

1. c., p. 488, note 1.

V. '5'. B. A. VI, py. 11-13, G8 my. Cf. V, pp. 8, 8, 1% VLt, pp. 63-71. Z'riins. 9. B. 8. VILI. pp. 347-331. ' P. 8. B. A., VIII, PJI. 243 S8y.

RecI~~rcI~es sur lo Gll/ptiyue oriewtnla, 1). 74. I! S. B. A. January Z, 1884. Collcctio~~ de Clo~cy., Yo. 46, p. 50.

' O Z. A. 111, p. 124.

I' Gosch., pp. 30, 3 1 , and Schrader's Ii. B. 111, llarL 1, p. 101 **. Cf. Uiblors., p. 44 soq. ' ' Z. A . I . 4 Ibid. : "guoique voi d'Agode, il n'est p i ~ s pliis Surgon, ~ U C lo8 e m p i ~ e t ~ r s L O I L ~ B eI i lo lbai ) .~ i i e

sont un 7nBrnepwsui~nigo.'' TVincliler's article in Rruue d' Assy~iologic I1 (quatcd in ynte~s., p. 70, note 4), was nn- fortunately not accessible to mc.

" In tlic llnliie l i l i n - g a - i ~ i ~ s h c ~ ~ C l i on n smtl cylinilor, publisheil by illdnant, Glyptiqzic I, PI. I , No. 1. Ci: \8inckler,

Altbnhylortisehe Ii'eilscl~~iftlexte (iluolc<l ns A . Ii.), No. GG.

"Even if it was proveil that SH.LR Ins tlle value of bin in a fzrv cases, it woulcl be utterly inipussible to give the

character this exceptional value in a Seluitic word list ( V R. 41, 1. ?!I, a, h ) . Cf. p. 18, note 4.

CIIIEFI~Y FROM NIPPUR. 17

regird to the close connection of tlicse three words as constituting the name of the Icing, and read accordingly Shcirgcil~i-shn7,-cili as one worcl. For, as Oppert properly states, i t is impossible to read thc name simply 87~ar-gri-7zi, inasmneh as, according to the parallel passages of the oldest Semitic cuneiform texts, in this case we olionlcl ex- pect the two parts (f l l~c(rg(i~~i and s7trir-tili) to be separated by a line. Only individl~al worcis, or two expressions very intimately connected,' as "soil of Itti-BC.1," " temple of BCl," "in Nipp~u,," we written togetl~cr without this selxirating line.' Titles are not considered to stand in such close connection with their antecedent proper names.

Hut, contrary to the view of the two E'rench scholars, I maintain the identity of Sargon and 87zary1irti-shar-(?li for the following reasons :

1. Ky the side of tlie l o i ~ g names of ltings and private individuals we find-at least in the last two thonsand five l~nnrlred yews of Babylonian history-abbreviated forms in use. The lists of kings and the contract tablets, not to mention other pas- sages, filmish amplc proof. Cf. e. y. Ki-an (List h:') with ifi-ctn,-)ti-lri (List a, Rev.) ; I ! - g ( t l ( l i s t b) with Iiil~-gcil-tlni~cc-6nl~; A-tlnrr, (List b) with A-darn-l;ctln7~z-m ; Bibe (List h) with 1%-be-in-shi; ' (PI. 26, No. 70) ; ICnb-ti-in ccbil~sluc shn Tirb-ni-e-a,:' with Iiubti-il(ini->kirclz~X: abil-sh,u sha ATcibri-teib-r~i-z1-.~7,1~~,'~ among hundreds of similar examples.' It is tlicrcforc higl~ly prol~ablc that a t some futnre time we shall find the abbreviated form Sharg2ni even on Sargon's own monuments.

2. I t was especially to bc expected in the cilse of a king famous above all others, and who so early i~ecame the hero of popnlar story, that t l ~ e longer naine should so" be abbreviatecl in tlie month of tlie people, and, finally, when it had ceased to bc intelligible, explained after the method of 'folk etyr~lology ',"as fl7icirru-ke^nzi, " the true Icing." ~oreo ;c r , I'inchcs la has pointed out, by coml~arison of Snmer. 7cuiyi?za =

rlssyr. ~CUI.I~.CL~LR, gishlii9z = Jiishkc~?zri, tliat the sign GI ({ye) was originally prononnced i~s yw, and that the EIcbr. jlJ7D represents this older pronui~ciat ion.~

I n this respect tllc writer of tlre stElc (18 Zohi,h is freer. Cf., Irowe~-ox., sha duppn, wllich is alrnays n-ritten on one l inc eveti in the S a r ~ o n i~~scr ipt io~ls from K i p l > ~ ~ r and in Illat of the bin^ oC Gnti.

' C f . P 1 . 1 , 1 . 3 , 1 1 , 2 4 ; P 1 . 2 , 1 . 1 , 2 , 1 1 , 1 2 , 2 3 ; l ' l . 3 , N o . 3 , 1 . l ; N o . 4 , ! . 1 , 3 .

\Vincliler, L i i ~ t e r s . , 11. 146, col. I, 4. For List a, cf. ibid., p. 14:.

' IIiIpl~ecl~t, "Die J'>rgiinxnog cler Namcn 7,~veier Rassitenkijnige," io %. A. VIII, in print. j Strassmzicr, X i b o i ~ . 183, 4.

" Slrassmnier, j A i r 6 0 , ~ . 132, 4 . Cf. Peisel; d u x Rahylo7~ischci~ I lecAt82cT~o~ I, 11. 11.

'Tlie sntllo principle of nbhl.eri:ning lrames i n evc~.yclay aso occnrs among nearly all ancient nations. Cf. 0 . g.,

Erninn, q q y p i e n aiid &iypliaches Lebin i,n A l t e ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ , p. 233 ; also the IIcbrcw clictionnrics ; Fick, L)iegi.icciLise?~en Per- soniLelL~inLen; 0. C~.usius, Are!ic J i t l i~hi ichet , 1801, 1'1,. 385.504 : "Die d n ~ v e n d u n g ran Vullnatnen und I<urznn~llen bei

derselbcn Pcrsoi~." For lllc last two rcfercnces I a m inilcbtcd to ury fricnrl an11 collc;~gue, Prof. W. 8 . Lnmbcrton.

Shri?g;iiii, " tlic ~>ome~.f~?l." See 11. 18, note 4. Hommcl, Gcscb., 1,. 301.

'I' 1'. 8. B. A , , VII, 1,. 07 seq.

" Cf. IIoll~mel, 1. o., 11. 303.

18 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS

3. It is absolutely impossiblc to regard Sargon, father of Nar3m-Sin, as ''perhaps an invention of legend."' Bo t were he one of the best known and mightiest rulcrs of the olden time,2 it was to bc expected that some monuments of his would be found in the thorough exploration of the rnins of the temple a t Nil>pur, where the greatest number of texts of his time3 ever fonnd has been brought to light. Where inscriptions of his less icnown son Narim-Sin, and of the hitherto altogetller ~ulltnown filnsharshid, have bccn discovcrcd, i t was a priori probable that inscriptions of S7~urg;~zn = 87~c~ryZna = Xharqrfni(u) wonld also comc to light. Therefore thc very absencc of the name in thc inscriptions thcre discovered is, in itself, a proof that the ancient king whose name commences wit11 Slzurgiini, and who is represented by six inscri~~tions, is no other than Sargon, thc father of Narknl-Sin. From this i t follows naturally that the later S h n r g i ~ ~ c i was mcrcly an abbreviation of S 7 ~ c ~ r g B n i - s 7 i a ~ - ~ ? Z i ,

According to Oppert, the name signifies "mighty is the lting of the city." There were also found in Nippur two brick stamps of N a r h - S i n , son of Sargon

I. Both contain the same lcgcnd. The monlds, however, that wcrc used in malcing them differ slightly in size a,nd shape. The inscription reads: 1. ~ l ~ . X ~ r i f r n - ~ ~ ~ ~ i r z

2. bkni 3. bit "UB&l, "Narlim-Sin, builder of the templc of B@l." I f wc may base -

an argoment on the place in which the stamps were found, as to the location of Narkm-Sin's b~~i ld ing, wc might conclude that he h i l t a shrine immediately on the

canal south from the Ziqqzcrrcctu, whilst his father confinccl himself in his bnilding to the east side of the temple platform. In any case, rrom the contcnts of the

' Winckler, Oescl~., p. 59.

' A s is proved by tire insc~.iptions of NaXna'W, mllere ho is callod "Iriug of Dilbylon ", Ily the "Legencl of S R ~ . gon," the Tablet of Omens IV It. 34, and tile nlention of his name in the List V R. 44, IS, ( 6 , b. 5Ioinaiel, s l l o reads erroneously Llcgel-girima (1 . o., pp. 301, :107, note 4 ) in the last quoted passzge, clistilrguisbes Snrgon of the list

asSarzon 11, e. 2000 B.C., from the ancient Sargan I. IIis arguments aro not convincing (cf. also Vinckler, Ut~ters. , 11. 45, note 2). I t is especially "tlle lristoricnl bncBground of tho work "-llio mention of Elam, Guti, ole., at sucli nn onrly

l l ~ r i o ~ l , mllicll is tlie ilrost valuable evidence for tlle high antiquity ;~n,l rclinbility of the stntemonts contained in tlie astrologicnl mark. Cf. illy rcmnrI<s in connection with the inscriptio~~s of the king of Guti 6~ud ~ l i ~ s h & i . ~ l ~ i d .

'Six ioscriptions of Slmrgilni-shar-iili, two of Nn~iim-Si7~, and sixty~one inscribed rases (or fragments) af hlusharshid.

' %. A. 111, p. 124. Cf. V R. 41, 20 n. b. : shar~gn-nu=dai~r&u. Slbnrqinu is ;L noun formi~tion in in (Dolitascl~, Grnm., B 65, No. :IS) from aroot S?ba~ngl~, which seerns tomenn " to be powerful, migllty." Cf t l~oIIebr. propor name ' Likewise the nanles Hingtni-shar-ili and ~l~usha7 . s i~ id contain the fortnative elcmont ,ilu. Tlierc are reasons for ideutifyiug this irlu (A l̂zc) rvitll Lluki, used as fin i~loogram for "na l~y lon" by Nebucl~ndrczznr I1 (misundoratood by Delilzsch, Mirte~buelb, 11. 6) . Cf. Hill,rocllt, The S ~ n c 1 1 ~ ~ School Times, 1802, No. 20, p. 30G szg. Nebncl~nilrezsar uses even ma2iizu nluuo (urLs) for "Bnbylon." Cf. r. g.VR. 34 ( Z . A. 11, 11. 142-14), col. I, 13 : znain ?i~a&iiz i , "to adorn tho City" ( i . e. Bnbylun, not " d i e Slidliidte," Winckler in Schmtler's I< 0. 111, Par t 2, 11. 39), For tlw use of ;ilu ~ill10llt ki, cf. belorn IGsh (Iflshshatr~).

CHIEFIIY FROM NIPPUR. 19

inscriptions of Sargon r~nd Narim-Sin it follows that the domillions of both inclndcd NLpp11r.~

'Phe list of ninety-two garmcnts,PI. 6, was found near the inscriptions of Namm- Sin. A s i t is written in Semitic (cf. I. 6, rubtiturn), and as, paleographically, there is no objection to such a conclusion, it belongs probably to Nar2m-Sin, or, in any case, to one of the earliest Selnitic ltings of llabylonia.

I11 this connection, I call attention to tlic interesting and important f:ht that the fragment of another vase (or probably of several) was discovered in the same dcep-lying stratum as the inscriptions of Sargon and ~ l u s h a r s h i d , and close by them. This fragment "ontains the statemeilt that " En-te(rnen)-?%a, patesi' of Shirpnrla," presented the vase to BGI of Nippul: When to t l~ i s we add that a vase of Narnm- Sin; and atlotl~el. of -4luslrarshid, as I have hccn informed, was fot~nd in Tello, we may safely conclode : 1. That the dominion of Sargon,' NarLm-Sin and of their immediate successors (or predecessors' ) extended also over the whole of Sooth Babylonia" (at any rate, :LS far as Shirpurla. '). 2. That the cl~ronology of the oldest Semitic rulers of Babylonia is aljproximately the same8 as that of thc earliest patesis of Shirpurla. 3. That the "kings of Sllirpurla" are carlicr than Sargon (or klusharshid '). It was apparently Sargon I or Alusharshid who pnt an end to thc independence of' the icingdon1 of Shirpurla. This is not the place for a detailed statement of all my reasons. They will be fo11nd in i i~ l l elsc~where.

T o the early Sellxitic rulers of' Babylo~lia already 1;nown must now be added, in conseclnencc of the discoveries at Nippur, King URU-MU-USH, as his name is written. Kot 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 Colitcnts. The fact that thcy were fo~lnd close to the monttments of Sa~gon, that lihe then1 they rLre writtcn in Scmitie, that the phraseology of PI. 4, 1. 11, 12 is very similar to lines 6, 7 of the vase inscrip-

' Cf. nbovo, p. 1% note 5, and p. 26, note 3.

It mill be ~iublislied in Vol. I, Part 2.

" I llold that the change of the title of lugal into pates6 in tire case of tho princes of Shirpurln is an indication of

their iloliticnl dei)cndenee (IIou~mel, 1. c., p. 290). Jcnson's view (Schrader's Ii, B. 111, Part 1, pp. 6-8) is somc-

what different. 'According to Oppert. Cf. IIommel, Geseh., pp. 200, tmto 1, 309.

Sce my rcmsrks in connection with the texts of $~lusharshid.

Cf. Hummel, 1. o., pp. 290, 311.

' nTincliler's stlggcstlon that Shirliurln is not identical with tile modern Tella or part of these ruins (C?rsch., pp.

24, 31, note 1, 44, 320), but that it Pay in North Uabylooia, is qnlte improbable, to me eron impossible.

this I s l i~ l~ t ly differ fiom IIomlnel (1. c., p. 296), who places Sargon and Nargm-Sin a little later tlian tlle

uidest pntesis of Sliirpurla.

tion of IUar2m-Sia, that 1)~1eogra11Iiic~1lly they s l~ow the charactcristie features of the inscril)tions of Sargon 311d his son7 all this p o i ~ ~ t s to the first half of' the fourth mil- lel~ni~irn as the approximatc date when tllcy were written. A s the language of the iascril~tions is Semitic, I regard the name of t l ~ c lcii~g also as Seiilitic and read ten- tatively .~lt~-us/~ccrs7zid,' i. e., " IIc (some deity) foundecl the city." '

The discovered inscril)tions of this Ling niay 11c c1:rsscd in SOL^ groups, consist-

ing of t l i i r tee~~, eleven, six and three lincs resl>ectively. Only three of the threc line I c g e ~ i ~ I s ~ have been preserrecl intact. Though not a single complete text of the six- line insc~.iptions has been cxc:lvated, yet the faint traces to be seen in the tl~ird-line of PI. IV, No. 13, and the space left for the restoration of the text, jnstit'y my read- ing ofP1. 5, S o . 6, 1. 1-3. The fi.agment reprodneed on PI. 6, S o . 10, is the only remnant of an eleven-linc inscril~tion found at Nippnr. It is in all respects sinli- lar to the thirteeli-line inscriptiolis, with this difference only that 1. 11, 12 of the latter7 i t% i~ccmrcck 3lurriti '" were on~ittcd. The inscriptioi~ of tl~irtccn lines has been rcconst~~icted from eleve11 fiagmciits, threc of \\hiell (PI. 111, Fragm. 8891, 8Y92, a, JJ) belonged to a large doloniite vase and formed the basis of illy text. Eighteen fraginents of all the cxcavatcd v u e s may confidently ' be referred to this group. The long inscription, of which some of tlie shorter ones are 1)ossihly abbro~~iations,' reads : 1. A-ncc 2. " ' 3 8 1 3. L"il~.r-zcslitcrehl 4. shcrr 5. I\lishshcttls 6. 2-nu 7. h'lcclr~tu"' 8. il 9. Ila-rcc-'-se '' 10. inircc 11: i l l ~ C I , I I ~ - ~ C C - C L ~ C ' 12. .l$lirn~ti 13. iddin (A-MU-

' Cf. B~.iinoom, 1. c., 5032, 5068.

"f. IIilprecllt, 2. A. VII, p. 315, note 1, and Pinclles, 2'Ite Acndeniy, September 5, 1801, p. 190. Even if the nnilio

be transliteraled UyarnzisT~, it may be Semitic. I n this case tlro O~ehr~mibs of Ovid (IMeta.iii., 4, 212) offers itself for com- parison.

I n spite of tlieii identicnl contents I rcproduceii two of them (PI. 5, Nos. 7 and 8 ) , because of tlie sligllt differ- ence in the form of tllc clrernctsrs US11 nud si~awz', and becauso me <lo not possess a supernbut~dant supply of texts 11:rting from that ancient pcriocl to mllich lhcy belollg. Tlre sign liublished on Pl . 5, No. 9, nnd resembling the Old

Babylonian character for ilu, "god," is found on tilo bottorn of a tlilrtl vnsc of tile Lllreeline group, nnd is, no doubt, merely a " t rade~marl~."

" I include hero only those f r s ~ m e n t s of wlricl~ portions of I . 5-13 liarc been prcservcd. Some of tlio olller frag-

ments, llowcver, l,robalily belong to tile s:tme group.

Necessary becnose of limited space.

"llis wort1 lias been variurlsly tmnslate(1. Ticle (Oesch., 11. 115) and otllers before ;end since chnngcd riamrald into Apimk , acitynientioneil on tile I1~blet of ot~iens, cnl. 11, 12-14. IIOIIIIIICI (GLscIL., 11~. 27!), 309) translntcs it " liolisl~ed

vorli," wllilst TVinclrler ( ( tesch. , 1,. 38) is content to render it simply "work." Bot all tllis is oxere s u e s work. ,I l o my k u ~ w l c ~ l g e , tile worcl I ~ s bee,, fo~ind ILLI IS far only in three passages, in tire ;cbove text of h~usiii irsi~ic~, on tile

vase of Nal:tm-Sin and in Gnilca B, col. G, 06. In the last passage we ~ . e ; ~ d 1. 64-F!) : sish I<U ~ t r i ~ A i ~ - s l ~ n - a n Nima !;i

mu-sif nanz-m ago-bi ~~~ioiilYi~r-gii-~i~L~c~ 3 - i i i n ? i l i ~ c ~ ii~u-?la-ni-kc? "T i l l , (his) iveajron llc sltiatc the city of Anslinn in

Elam, brouglit its s~luil illto EnirlnG to Ningirsu." Cf. Jcnsen (If, B. 111, Par t 1, PI>. 38, 30) on tills passage. Tlic latter's llesitntion about tllo rPa~lillg iVi?ni~ ji, " E i ; ~ m " (exnct,ly so \\,ritten above), and the lneauing of nnrnval; is

unnecessary. As early ;xs eigllt ycn1.s :ago. Aniinud, with liis n.untec1 illsight, conceive<l the correct n~eaning of tile word (Z. K I, 17. 240). Wlietller it is Snmerian or Semitic remibins to be iletemincd. As we do not posscss long

SHUB),' " ~ l a s h a r s h i d , king of liishshatn, presented (it) to Be1 from the spoil of Elam, when ire had sul~jugatccl Elam a ~ ~ d Bat.a7sc."

The inscription is of 11istorica1 importance. W e learn from it, that Icing ~ l n - sharshid sobducd Elall1 and the co~untry of Bara'se, doubtless in close proximity to it,' and that in the booty hc carried off to Babylonia a nurnbcr of costly marble vases. Pa r t of them he dcclicated to BZ1 of Kipper, and part, perhaps, to Shamash of Sippara, %after Rrst having engraved ul~on most ' of them in bcautifi~l clear-cut characters liis name aild the occasion of the gift. The inscription s~lffices to show that i i l~~sharsh id was a mighty ruler., who in conrage and adve~~tnrous spirit was not second to NarCm-Sin. But it also offers most welcome ll~ntcrial for detcr- mining the extent of the dominion of the oldest Semitic rnlers. I t f~~rn i shes addi- tional sopport to Tielc's view (GescT~., p. 114), and a t the same time proves that Wincltler's conception of the beginning of the North Babylonian history and of the extent of Sargon's empire (Cesch., 1). 38) is incorrect. Vincliler proceeds npon t11e crl.oneons supposition that the deeds of Sargon, as reported in the tablet of omens and in the "Icgend," are purely legendary. Hommel also (d'esch., 11. 306 sep.) is ham- pered by similar prejudices. That Narrtm-Sin was in the poiscssion of Sonth Baby- lonia is demonstrated by his building in Xippur (br ir t i bit B8l), and by his vase found in Tello, and is fnrthcrmore established beyond 311 doubt by his soccessfi~l ol>erations in Magan," which, according to Wincliler, was situated 011 the eastern boundary of Arabia. A vase of thc Se~ilitic liiiig of' G ~ t i , ~ beloaging to this same ancient period, which was probably carried by a victorious Habyloniall king as trol111y to Sippara, points to the extension of'tlie power of the oldest Korth Babyloniall rnlers

descriptions of compnigns in Slnucrian, i t cilnllut be surprising that tlie word does nut occur otl~erwice in Sumerinn

inscriptions, wl!icll dcal ~ ~ l o s t l y mitll religious affairs and tLccounts of builclings. In favor of a Sen~itic etymology, to wllicll I incline, i t m:iy be said : ( I ) Tlrat the word "looks "cry nlucll lilro nn originnl m-furmatioil of a root 113 " (Jenseu) nnrl (2) that it is twice found in tho Semitic inscriptions of the oldest North Bnbyloninn mlcis.

It is nut to ho read a.mu-~u and to bo derived from ,GIIZ?TU will, the ti~eaning of "crscheii." (Honnuel, GesoA., p. 302). i a,, "to dedicate " (Pincl~cs, Trans. S. B. A. VIII, 17. 330). Of. Aniinud, Z. A . 11, p. 296, ilnd Jenscn in

Schritder's Ii. B, 111, Part 1, p. 26, note Xo. For s i ~ t ~ b = nailhtau-- nndQ (711, cf. n11. "gift," Ezek. xvi. 33), cf. Tall-

quist, Babglonisci~e S~?~e~il~t~1~gsbriefe, p. 0.

T o t h i n g more ilrfinite can be sitid at present. It is, perlml~s, to be rend Pu~n'se. Cf. the rlnlne of t l ~ lnountnin

Da-ti-<? (sidle de ZoXb I, col. I, C), mllicil Scheil (1. c., p. 104) col.rectly identified lvitl l the moantaiu Pad(d)i?.

(SI~amsAi-IlomnLan 11, col. 11, 7).

:' According to Pinches ,Jeosen, inscriptiolls of Blusllnrsilid lravo also been founrl io Sippara. Cf. Ti~e Academy, September 5, 1591, p. 10% P. S.

' A nunlbci of vases of the same high workmanship and fo~,n<I imiong them were without iilscriptions. Cf. below, 1). 30.

I. R. 3, No. VII, 1. 7, i i a m ~ n k Hagnn, "plunder of 3Iagun." Wf. p. 12 seq.

22 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCI~IETIO~S

fnrther northward. The inscriptions of ~ lus l l a r sh id testify to his supremacy over the South,' and to his victories in the East and Korth-East of Babylonia. 111 view of all this, I regard it as impossible to qnestion the historical cl~aracter of the ~ta temcnts of the tablet of omens relative to XarLm-Sin. Since we linow that about that time a Semitic population dwelt in the northern and northeastern conntries of Gut i and I ~ u l u b i , ~ whose Icings wrote inscriptions on roclis and vases in a dialect crrtircly identical with the Babylonian, it can no longer seem strange that Nar2m-Sin tool< the Semitic king 12ish-Bcbmmrin, of Apiralc, prisoner. It is evident, however, that Apirak, which by its termination forcibly recalls i~ames like A(E)shn~~na l< ,Vs to be songht in the North-East' of Babylonia rather than in the South. ' If the credibility of the tablet of omens is tl~ereforc established as far as ATar?tm-Sin is conccnicd, we are IIO longer at liberty to call in question what it relatcs concerning Sargon I , unless more solid objections than have heretofore been raised, bc brought against it. V i t h Tielc, therefore, I regard as h c t s what Wincliler dcscl.ibcs as fiction, viz., that Sar- go11 1 subjngatcd nearly the w-hole world liilown to him, or in other words, "the four qnarters of the earth."

But llow is it that whilst Sargon always boars the title s l ~ a ~ ~ r ~ dunlzu sl~rcr Agcitle or dultnu shar Aylade or only slin?. Ayacie,' both in thc legend and in his own inscrip-

1 Includiug Layash. Cf. p. 10. T i l i s fact argues in favor af n ~nigratiou of the Semites into Babylonia from tlle Xorth. Cf. the "legend of Sar-

Son," according to wllicll his uncle dwelt in tile monntains, and lli: himself was carried <lawn the rivor in an ark mado

of reed. Cf. also Wincirler, aesoh., p. 141. V o g n o n fonnd tllere Semitic inscriptions xvritlon by palesin of Ashnunak. Sothing can be said with cerfainty

as to thc enact date of tllese texts, but tlrey secm to belong to t l ~ e second millenuium U. C. Cf. Poguun, d)uelqucs ~ o i s

du pays <l 'Aek i~ounnak , rend nt the Acad6,i~ie des insc~ ip t ions et belles lelfres, I I i ~ r c l ~ 18, 1898. On this country see fnr-

tller Delilasch, Parndics, 1,. 230 sey.; Iiossiicr, p. GO ; nud also Jetisell in Scl~l.ilder'~ li. B., P ~ r t I, p. 137, noteu.

Homrnel is on tho right tracli (Gesch., 11. 310, note 1). His rcndlng A-nia-rnk, Ilowever, has oeitlier supt>ort 1101

probability. Delitzscl~, A~,,udies, p. B31, " zicmlicI& acdl ich zu suci~e?~."

"regard also Sargon's campaign in tlle West, to tile IIediterrsnean Sca and to Cyprus, as I~istoiic facts. Tile

cylinrler of Xilri~m-Sin's servant found a t Cypros, and now in the IIetrupalitan Xoseum af New Tork (cf. Sayco, l'ra7ts. 8. 13. A. V, p. 441 scy . ) , has, l~owever, no direct benriog npoo the ~vliule quostion. Through tlio kintlness of Prof. Isaac IIall, Curator of tile JIusoi~m, I vbtaiueii au accurate imgressian of tl~ecylinrlor, to whicll, for pnlco~rapliic reasons (obscrre, e. g . , tlle form of the character ru), I cannot assign an enrlior date than c. 2000-1500 B. C. Tho

pictures an it also point to a more recent date. I%ot the cylinder is ~uldoubteilly no modern forgery (IIammol, 1. c.,

1,. 309). 7 Kabana'id calls liim, for apparent reasons, s76ar Bbbili. I t is in itself not i~npossible t l ~ a t tilere were kings of

Babylon a t some time in that ancient pcriail. Fur the place where the vase of Sarilm-Sin was founrl by tho French

expetlition, the tablet of omens (I, 7-11. ef. my restorntion of this passage below, 11. 20) and the occasional mentioning of Babylon (under another nnmc) in tlre Snmerian inscriptions of the kings and !,ntcsis of Shirpurlu clenrly show that

Babylon not only existed at this early time :~iid belonged to Sargon's kingclom, but that it eve~rlrad nlreaily obtaincd considerable prominence (cf. below, p. 20). Cf. I~owovor, Winclilet', Linters., p. 76 sey., and Lehn~ann, SI~i~,nnshskurn-

&in, p. 00, note 4.

OIIIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 23

tions, his immediate successor, Narkm-Sin, styles himself shnr l c i b ~ n t n~ha'i, and ~ l u s h a r s h i d and MA-AX-ISH-TU-SU1 even s l~ur Ifishsl~atu? This qnestion 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 discussio~~ of this qnestion as its importance de- mands. I thcrcforc content mysclf for the present with giving the results of my investigations. A s I am now considering the meaning of these titles i n the earliest times only, I ~latiu.ally exclnde their use with the later Babylonian and with the ,\ssyrian ltings.'

I. ,Ls to the Old Babylonian titlc, s I b c 1 ~ liisl~sl~atu, we h a w been accustomed to follow IVincltler, and to repird it as simply the eqnivale~lt of the later PILCLT kish- sl~citi, "1,ing of thc world." ' This identification, howcvn, is not proved. On the

other hand, it is worthy of notc, (1) that s~lpposiilig ~ lusha r sh id lived after Narhm- Sin, and even supposing further that he fouudcd s new dynasty, it vould still be

matter for astonisl~ment that he s11o11ld exchange a titlc, that was not only satisfactory to Nar2m-Sill, known as a grcat conqneror, but was in itsclf sufficiently significant, for the sy~lonymoils sliur k i s l i s l ~ n t i , "Icing of tlic world;" ' (2) that no later Bahy- lonian Icing, beforc Mcrodachbaladan I, not eve11 the powcrfnl Hammnrabi, bears this title, though many of them apply to thcmsclvcs the titlc s71nr 1~i l ; i .u t a ~ b u ' i ; (3) tha t Winclilcr's thcory, which sees in Harran thc original seat of the shnrrcit /a's7zshati, is

imlwobablc for the later Babylono-Assyrian time, and altogether ont of qncstion for

'TVincklor, A. X., No. 67, Pnloograpiiic reasons, tile Semitic 1an:unge of the inscription and tho titlc shnr E s h -

si'atffl, establish for tllis iiillg a date not only earlier than 2000 B. C. (Winckler, Gesci~., p. 155), but even earlier thnn 3000 B. C. 110 is to be classctl with &losirarslli~l. The white marl~le dock (Norris, 01 the Assyr ian and Rabyln,8iiin

Il'eigi~ts, PI. 2, No. 2). bearing the uzlme of AVaTa6B-sI~~s~.li5al. SILIII . I C i s l ~ s l ~ a t ~ , remains \vitllout consideratiou here, ;LS I du 1101 fool at liberty to base any pnleograpllic conclnsions on tlic cuneiform tent ns it is publisi~crl therc.

'I llilpe to treat the nliole questiou in anotller place. That me m ; ~ y understand correctly t,lle meailing of this title in Assyrian, the folloming points inust be exalninell moro cnrofuily : ( I ) Is tilo titic simply to be regarilerl as b o r ~

rowed from Bilhylonin (cf. pufosi, templo names, etc.) and exten<leil to cover Assyrian conditk,ns, so tlrat only thc

name is Bahylonhn, wiiilo its seinnsiulogical dcvolopk~~cnt is essentinlly Assyi.inn? (2) Or, in using tlie title, did thc .%ssyrinns claim tile satno right over tlic snme district ns tilo Babylonians, i. e . , suppose tirat in Babylonia a claim

was tllcreby erpscssed to IInrran (TYinckler), did tile ilsayrit~ns by tlleir use of tlic phrase mi~lce exactly the snme clni~n upon this city? (3) Or is tilere no colrt,ection botweon the Assyrian nnil the Bi~byioni i~n t i t le? Thesequestions have hitllerto not been ans~vererl snlllcientiy.

:'~IIitteilt~ngeii; cles Akarles~iuri~. O1,iantnlise6en Fewins z i ~ BerlDz I , p. 14.

'Cf. .Tensen in Schmdor's If. 11. 111. Par t 1, p. 106, nolc 4.

"I wc may draw :any C O ~ C ~ I I S ~ O I I fi.011l t,lx later CLIS~OIIIS of l3abyloi1ia~1 iwd Assyrian Irings, v e rather expect

titat in the n.l,ovc givcn case, ~ i u s l ~ ; l r s h i ~ l , wiloso empire mas scnrcely slualler than tli;ct of Nnrim-Sin, nccording to

our present kl~owledge, ~voul,l hnre Been p:~rticnlal.iy nasious to :~dlu:re to n title whicil \\,as connected by tilo Baby-

ioni,zu pcolile with tho niune of n very powerful ruler, ;tnii rrgnrtle<l b y the later Icings ns especially ioipol.tnrrt. L\nil vice ue?sn, if ~ lusht%rsbi r l livocl before Snrzon nod lvarl founcled i~ shorriLt kishshnii, "kingdom of the ~1.orlc1," it would

be strange that Narilm-Sin sl~oulll iisve used siinr k i b ~ a t arba'i instead, if the othor titlc meant exactly the same.

24 OLD BABYLONIAN INSORII'TIOXS

the earliest period.' I therefore wolild propose another explaoat io~~ of thc title, viz , to regard s7mr liishshntu (or s7~cw ICish) as idelltical with s7tcc~ IL'ish, " l t ing of Icish."' I n other words, I infer from this title tha t there \\.as a Lingdo111 of the city of Kish similar to those or Shirpurla, Llgadc, ctc., at the earliest time of the Baby- l o n i a ~ ~ Iiistory. Two of its rulers are so far k~ lomn; both xrrotc Semitic, and one of the111 at least possessed South Babylollis and defeated Ela111. Whether these I c i n g s

li\red after the dgl~asty or Sargon, or whether they preceded it and were c l e t h r o n c d

by Sargon, will be. considered irelow. A t all erelits, it will be well to seyarnte the lii~~gs of Iiish "om those of Agade. . There is n1nc11 in favor of the vie\\- that eve11 in the A s s y ~ . i a i ~ rni~ld ' the title s71ar kishshuti mas originally connecttxl with the possessio~l of Xish, x \ ~ l i c r e Tiglath-Pilcser 111 offered sacrifices to the gods ( I1 R. 67, 11).

11. nut what does shai l;ib~r(t arbu'i mean in the oldcst B:~hgloninn history? After Sargon had sabj,jngnted the Elamites; thus fixing the 11at11ral eastern boundary of liis projected great empire, hc marched to the West, " subdued ' the land of the Wcst,' conqnered the fonr qualtcrs of the ~vorld." The last part of the previous sen- tence, literally quoted fi.om the tablet of omens, call in itself be i~lterpretcd a s

meaning ( a ) that "the four quarters of the world" lay still beyond " the land or the West," imd therefore were geographically distinct from it, or (6) that the conclr~est

'Cf. :iIso A. hIcz, Geschichle der' Sladf ifir,.~iin in jllesopotamies, 11. 27.

'As I remarked above, I cannot statc nil the rcasons for my tlieory liere. At yesen t it tnny suillce to give tlic fal- loivlng : (1) Cf. my restoration of IV R. 34, 7-11 below. (2) Cf. DDik~scll, Pavurlies, p.218 s e q . , mhere it is stated tllnt

tile Semitic R~~bylonians nut1 Assyrians wrotc lliis city ;ilso ICi-si~n (and E-c.isl~, Brit. AILIS., 81-8-10, 1, col. I, 41, pub-

lished by s. .\. Smitll, !llisecZliaiicozas Assyrinx Trzts, PI. 20 ; cf. also the prescut volumz, Pi. 8, No. 14, 1. 7 ) , nnd If i8R-

s7ln.tu, "according to a smnll nnpublislled vocnbulary " (cf. Pkrailies, p, 230). (a) Cf also the n;tme of tile nncient king, iibil-Ifishhi, known from the frngmcnt of n Babylonian cllrouicle (Trnns. 8. B. A. 111, 372), aucl to wllom Delitzscl~ (Gesci~., 13. 7 2 ) correctly assigns ilrc fourill millennium.

' I nfterwarcls found lliat Jenselr (Sch7.nder's K. B, 111, Pilrt I, p. 202, note), indopendently of me, i~.auslitted "king

of I<ish" in tile inscription of AIaniihtusu (Winckler, A. I<., No. 07). lIis rcasons for so doing and his eouclusions

nro botll unknown to me.

Tile facts that Rilmmin.nirhri, nllu defc;ited tlie 13sbylonian king, Nnzi-Ilt~ruttasll, nonr I<%r-Isht;lr, is the fi~.st

Assyrian ruler who bcnrs the title shn, kishsl~nti (in tlro ioscription of his sun, Slinlrr~anescr I , I R. 0, No. IV, 1. 2 ) ; and further, tliat Tokr~lti-Slnib I, Iris gl.andson, \vllo also claims tile title, must hnvo been in tile possessiou of I<isl~,

as he had c~p lo rod cven llabylon (18. P.%, Vol. V, p. 111, col. IV, ?,my.); and last, t l u t neilllcr hshurdnu I, nor

IIotakBil-Nnskn, nor even Aslinr-r0slr-islli llas tliis title (I11 R. 3, No. 6, 1. 1 null S), deserve especial ~ t t en l ion in toll-

ncctiou \\.it11 my hypotliesis. Aftorwards the ancient mcnning of the title v n s lost, nnd s l ~ a ~ IfislLskc~ti, "king of

Kish," becatirc shar kishs7~icli, "king of tile world " (mliich m;ty, llowevi!r, have h e n tho very first meaning of lire title boforc it wirs connectecl ~vitll Iciih ; cf. the ilevolol>mcnt of tlre menniog sl~ai. 1;ihat iwhn'i).

"V R." 34, col I, 1-3. 1 regnnl the nrruugement of tire inrlivido;rl ileeils, relntcil in t l ~ c tablet of ooicus, as cIil.on- ologic:il. Among ollicr rc:lsonF tllc accaiult of Sargon's lllree expeditions ng;\inst tile West fi~r.ol.s tllis view. It nws

:~lso u:ltnral tiir~l tilo king, before marchio: to the West, slloulii protect l~ilnself in the rear by s~~bjrignling tllc Elawites in t l ~ e East, so that during liis long nbscncc no danger uligllt t l l re~ten B;~bylanii~ from that quarter.

CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 25

of "the four quarters of' the world" is identical with his conqt~cst of "the lsnd of the Wcst," or (c) that the conquest of " the four quarters of the world " followed as a rcsnlt upon his snbduing the West. I n opposition to the first view is thc fact that a liingdo~n of "the four quarters of the ~vorlcl" in the far West is nowhere else mentioned, that the phrase stands withont the usnal determinative m.itu, cilu, etc., and that this title was claimed by Babylonia11 kings even when they made no con- quests in the West.' The identification of thc "four quarters of the world" with "the land of the Wes t" needs 110 rcfi~tation, as it has never been advanced, and in fact has no support. W c can, therefore, only regard the conquest of " the four qua,rters of the world " as the result of Sargon's victories in the West, so that by the nsc of the title the claim is made to a quasi-worldwicle dominion,' as has been cor- rcctly stated by Lehnlann ( I . e., 1). 94). Arid indeed, Sargon, after having coilqnered the West, was fully jnstificd 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 thc Arabian desert, to march victoriously first to the ATorth, then to the Wes t and finally southward. The ene1nie.i in the East having been l~revionsly sub- ducd, and South Babylonia bei~ig also brought under his sceptre," he could indccd call a kingdom his own which was enclosed on all sides by natoral honndaries.'

The city which had obtained the Iiegemoay through Sargon's deeds was ilgade." F o r he calls it "my city " ("Legend," 1. 26). It is the city in which he was shut 111) doriug the insurrection against him (IV R.2, 34, col. I, 37). And fi~rtherillore, in all his inscriptions as yet fotulld, lie calls himself' "liing of Agade." But, if I understand the tablet of onlens correctly, Agade does not appear to have been the capital of the cnlpirc of the fonr quarters of the world, as one would naturally have supposed. After Sargon had sul)jngated "the whole world," he regarded as his next work the building of a capital worthy of this grand empire. Thc account of this

important work is evidently related in I V R.', 34, I. 7-10, a passage6 nnfortuuately much mutilated and heretofore entirely mis~ulderstood. After a careful comparison

'Against Tiele, Gesch., p. 78.

2Tiele (1. c., py. 73, 78) concedes the possibility, indeed even the probibility of tllis explanation, but adds, that

the title lllay also lravelrad an entirely different meaning (11. 75). But wllat else coulil it 1l:lve lnesuL with Sargon 1 1

JThis is evident from liis building in Nippur, ant1 from the fact t l ~ a t even his son, who was less prominent tllnn

his father, extended his iuHuence to Shirpurla. Cf. also the express statonleuts of the "Legend."

'The Elamite mouutaius on the oast, the mountains of h r m e n i ~ on the north, the Ifediterranean Sea (and

Cyprus) on the west and tile Persian Gulf on the soutll.

' In spite of nil that has been said in support of Agunc, I regard this rendiog as improbable (cf. my remarks on Qande, 1). 28). Le11m;~nn's statements (I. c., 1,. 73) prove nothing nyailrst Agnde. 3101'0 as to this in another 13lace.

T o r recent trallslntions cf. IIonlmcl, Cesclb., p. 305, and Wi~ickler in Schn~dor's h: B. 111, Part 1, 11. 102 scg.

of the text as give11 in the first and second editions of IV R.,' 1 transliterate and

restore the passage as follows : BI~a~-ge-nn sh,cc ilzrc, 8311B cm-ni-i lii's7~-shu ['i2] Bibit~'%-[[sI~ii-]' shu11~-mcc, epr2 shn shnl-la btibu TU-NAi) is-su-&mu . . . . [ilzcc, lime?]-221. A-ya-cle ""?lu i bu-s7~t~-mw [UB. DA]"hi slzum-s7~; im-67,~-u . . . . [inn lib-] bi u-she-s7ti-bu, " Sargon, who under this omell bronght sorrow upon Rish 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 wo~,ld,' and caused the inhahitants of l i lsh and Babylon (?) to dwell there."

1 infer from this ( ( 1 ) that IiZsh and Babylon existed as prolnincnt cities already in the time of Sargon 1, as this great ruler deemed it necessary to render them harm- less; (b) that the clyllasty of Xish was overthrown by Sargon I,6 and that the~.cfore iilnsharshid and Manishtusu are to bc placed before Sargon 1 ; ' (c) that the reason why the vases of ~ lnsharsh id , all badly broken, were found lying closc by the corn-

-

~ ~ a m t i v e l y well-preserved monuments of Sargon, but not by those of Sar%m-Sin, is tha t ~ l n s h a r s h i d apparently ruled before Sargon, not after Nal.:lrn-Sia.

The question arises, Which city corresponds in later times to that bnilt by Sargon "in the vicinity (?) of Agade," and with which the title "Icing of the four quarters of' the world " ' was associated ? There are reasons for ideutif.yiying i t with l iu tha ,

~ -

as Wincklcr Qoes. Bot stronger arguments seem to l~oint to U r ~ a g k a l a m a ' ~ with its famous temple, "the mountain of the world," (always iileiltiolled in close connection with Iiish, the probable seat of the shal,rl;t 7;is7~s7~uti), as being identical with "the city of the world" 'I founded by Sargon I.

I This important test soellls to llavo srtffcrcd still more since its first l~ublicntion by George Slniill iu I V R.', as B

conlparison with Pincl~es' lrcw edition clearly s11on.s. EIatl all tlie differences botwecn the first and sccond editions of

tile text, broilglit about by n decon~positio~~ of tho tablet, lrcen c;~vehlly noted, it would have bcen of great value, ns

the first edition is n<,t nl~vnys nccessiblo 10 students.

Cf. V R. 12, No. 6, 50 ; 11 R. VZ, 67 c : Il-i.sht~ (cf. aboye, p. 24, note 2 ) . Pcl.l(aps X i is rr2auting, nail 76, "and,"

is tu bo substituted. :"Ilis is the most probable rci~diog, according to the tracos in I V R.?. Cf. I<. 3667, col. I, (I ( i - 8 7 h ? i - t ~ ~ h ) , and I V

H.' 1," 42, a, " tlie sickness rvllich b~.ings rroe upon tile country" (i-nsia-siioshzi).

'Thcse five cllnracters are not qilile clcar to me, tlroi~gll it is evident that Sargon pnrliusely dcstrogcd solnctliing.

6 T l ~ e two vedges begiiirliog tllo c1,aracter Ul3 arc ciearly to be seen in I V It.', and tllc last tn-0 wedges of Dh

still remain in I V R.'. 31ol.c Illnil two cl~uracters cannot birve stood there. For the nlenniug of UB.DA, witliont

arba'i, cf. Jensen, Kosmoluyie, 1). 167. BFor var iou~ other retisons tllc city k i l l g ~ l ~ t ~ ~ of 1 '3~1~ C & U I I O L bc placed aftor Sarxon I. 7P:tleogrtlphical reasons also favor this cl>ronological arrengemont of tlro two dgnastics. I reacllcd llry conclusion

aftcr tile plates in question were p~.inted. 1'1. 4 5 and TII-V arc to be plsced before those of Sargon I and Narim-Sin.

&It is quite possible that monuments of Sargoil may yet be found, on wllich l ~ e cells llilnself "Iring of tlle four

quarters of tile eaitll." = e . g., Gesoh., pp. 31, 33.

IOFor this rending cf. deusen in Scl~nr<Ier's & B. 111, P i ~ r t 1, 11. 2& note 3.

LLCf. Wiuckler's roorarks, 1, c., p. 33, in connection with " G'l~arsagknlama."

THE D Y N A S T Y OF ISIN.'

Thrce liings of this dynasty were among the builders of the temple a t Nippur, U~-Niwib, JSu1.-651)lil~. J , and Ishme-Dagcin.' Specimens of brick legends of the latter will be given i11 the second half or this volume. The fragment of a stone pub- lished on PI. I), No. 17, is nnfbrtnnately so small that we learn nothing new from it.

More important are the inscriptions of both the other rulers, PI. 1 0 and 11. They are talcen from bricks which, at the time of their excavation, were out of their origioal place. These formed rather part of a platform of the Ziqqnrratu con- structed or restored by Mili-Shilthu, who toolr them fi.om the ruined walls of his predecessors, as old b a t still serviceable material for his own worlr. Various briclis of Ur-Ninib have thus been preserved, all with the same inscribed (not stamped) legend. Of Bur-Sin, on the other band, only a single brick, brolicn in two pieces, has as yet been fonnd.

Ur-Ninib, " Ma11 (servant) of God Nillib," is tlie king hitherto wrongly tran- scribed as Gamil-Ninib.' Elis inscription, here published, is identical with 1V R.' 35, No. 5. The fragment of a brick from Nippnr, I It. 5, No. XXlV, erroneously ascribed to Isl1me-Dag3n, is obvionsly the lowcr half of the same legend. I n

-

additiou to the complete name of the r~ller, the new text o&rs the correct reading of

1. 4, ~LU-gid,' i. e., nzkiclu, EIebr. ~ p j , "shcphcrd " (of Ur), and of 1.6, mi-shti-il, "he who delivers the commal~ds " (of Eridu).

Bur-Sin I, so designated by me to distinguish him from another Iting of the same name,' Bnr-Sin I1 of the second dynasty of Ur,"s a new liing of the dynasty of Isin. The phraseology of his i~~script ion is very similar to that of Ur-Ninib and Libi t -An~ul i t~ (I it. 5, No. X V I I I ) , alid thereby assures the correct reading of several characters of the latter illscription. The first sign of 1. 4 is not du (Wincltler) hnt illgar (identical with Briinnow, I . c. 1024), and tlie second sign in 1. 8 is probably

' Not N ~ ~ D L , as has heen generally read-last hy Delitzscl~, GescRioI~te Babyloniens z l i~d Assg~iens, p. 70. Cf. tlie hymn 80, 7-19, 126, 1. 3, 4, publislled by Berold in Z. A. IV, p. 430.

PI. 9, No. 17, lras been placed before Plates 10 and 11 only to savo space. Islrme-Dag2u was the last king of the dynasty of Isin.

Cf. FIilprecht in Z. A. VII, p. 315, note 1.

'For this Semitic lorn ward of the S ~ l r ~ ~ e r i a n Inngnage, found also in tllo inscrililions af Gudes (F. col. IT, 12),

cf. Jensen-Zlulrnern in Z. A. 111, 200, 308 seq. Cf. also Jensen in I<. 11. 111, P ; ~ r t 1, p. 4.

A l t l l o ~ ~ g l ~ alrvays written will, the atller sign L?UT (BI.U~IIOW, 1, c. , 0068).

Cf. Plates 12, 13, and Vol. I, Par t 2.

' According to TVinckler in Sclirader's IT. B. 111, Pait I, p. 80, Libit-hlitnr. Ct: Jcusen-Zimmem, Z. A. 111, p. 109 sep.

CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUH. 29

BQI, his beloved lord, G a ~ i d e has presented it." But who was this Gande who left his name on a number of marble vases,' on a large nnhewn block of white marble, on two others of reddish granite and 011 the edge of two door socltets belonging to former Babylonian icings? A due consideration of the following points will enable us to answer the question.

1. The short inscription of Gande jnst translated is written not only on bis own monliments by this Icing, but is also found on the rough edges of a door socltet of Sargon I, n.nd another of Bor-Sin IT. Hence it follows, that Gsnde 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 place in which the stones were fonnd and also from the peculiar characters of the inscriptions (see below), that Gandc could not have ruled arter Mili-Shikhu, or, as the immediate seven or eight predecessors of the latter arc known, not after c. 1240 I%. C.

3. It is remnrltable that Gande by two of his inscriptions characterizes door socltets which had previously been presented to the temple as his own gifts. I t is in itself clear that these inscriptions cannot be regarded in the sense of inventory labels, as they are sometimes fb1111d in connection mith Egyptian antiqnitieu. Only one explanation seems possible, namely, that Gande was not a native iring, but invaded and conq~lered Babylonia and regarded the property of the temple in Nippnr as his legitimate spoil. As however he, with his victorious hordes, did not leave tbe

subjected conlltry again, hut u s ~ u l ~ c d the Babylonian throne, thereby becoming the fo~ulder of a new dynasty, the conquered cities and temples became part of his new empire, to which he 110~1- restored the trophies of his victory as his owlr personal gifts. IIad he left Babylonia, he certainly would have carried away the treasnres of the temple as spoil to his own country, just as ~ l u s h a r r h i d and Narhm-Sin did, after they had conquered Elam and Magan, or Xebochadrezzar I, a ~ t e r the destruction of' Jernsalem.

4. This explanation of G m d e is sopported by the character of his inscribed objects and by tbe pecnliarity of their cuneiform writing. All his inscriptions are

carelessly executed and are engraved very shallowly; indeed, those on the door socliets and large bloclcs are only scratched in the unllewn stone. Besides, the char-

acters employed violate the laws which underiie the regnlar developme~lt of the Babylonian cuneiform writing. They appear to have been c ~ l t by men nnaccustomed to use the chisel in writing, who, it is plain, had adopted the Babylonian system of writing, even e~~deavoring to imitate the characters of a ccrtain period,' bnt who were neither familiar with their original meaning, nor with the

Cf. \'01. I, Part 2. 'Cf. e. g the characters of tlre inscviptions of Ur-Nina, de Sarzec, Dieoz~ae~les, PI. 51, No 1.

30 OLL) BABYLONIAN INSCtlIl'TIONS

exact form t l ~ e ~ i ill me. The scribe regarded e. y. G , I N (Pl. 1 4 , No. 22) as the doubled form of a certain sign resembling the reversed ancient SAIG.' For oecasion- idly he divides this character illto l~alves, placing one after the other (PI. 14, No. 24, 25). The artistic execution of the vases themselves stands in strilting contrast to the rude appearance of the inscriplions on them and on the large stones. A s a num- her of n~linscribed vascs of similar form and of the sarne sliillfiil workmanship were fo~uld together with those of ~ l u s h a r s h i d , there is every reason to believe that Gande's vases fornled originally part of the former's gift to the temple, the more so as they were fonnd in close pl.oximity to those of that very a ~ ~ e i e n t lting. Only the unhewn bloelis of marble aud granite, apparently intended for door soelzets, 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 cvcll smoothed, we likewise infer that the scribes of this ruler had neither the artistic taste nor teeh- nical training of the Babylonian stonccnttcrs.

5. The name Gunile has not a Babylonian sound. Besides, it is sometimes fo~uld abbreviated into GUIL. This peenliarity of abbreviating l~arnes is eharacteris- tie of the rulers of the second and third dynasties of Babylon, as is shown by corn- paring List b with List a and with the inseriptio~ls of Bibeiashu.' Only one liing ft~lfills the requirements (viz., a foreigner, foru~lder of a new dynasty, a prince whose name begins with Gnn, and who lived between e. 2400 and c. 1240 B. C.). This is

Gandash, the first r ~ ~ l e r of the Cassite dynasty, which oceripied the throne of Baby- lonia for five hnndred and seventy-six years. Gande (otherw. Gan) is abbreviated from Galldash in the same way as Ribe from Bibeiashn."

It is significant that, with the exception of f r a g m e ~ ~ t 13rit. Mus. 84-2-11, 178 (see riole 3), no m o n ~ i r ~ l e ~ ~ t 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 1 shall later show in detail, the very centre and stronghold of the Cnssite dy~lasty. It is not, therefore, accidental, that the representatives of this foreign l ~ o r ~ s e dedicated so many valaable gifts to the temple of Be1 in Nil~pur. By not paying the same hom- age to Mardulc of 12abylon and his illustrious city, which Hammurtabi9ad endeavored to raise to the most promi~ier~t position in the political and religions life of the country,

Amiartd et llBchinoau, 1. c., No. 221.

'' Cf ~bove , p. 17. " Who again is identical with tho Gnddssh of Brit. IIus. 84-2-11, 178 (Winckler, L7nfers., p. 166, No. 6). Cf.

EIilprecht, 5. A. VII, p. 309 sey., especially note 4.

T f . Hilprecht, "Die Erginsung dcr Namen awoier I<assitenkoniga" in Z. ;I. VIII (in priot).

It is wortily of notice, that not ono votive object with an inscription of ruler of the first or second dynasty of

Dnbylun has so fnr been found in Nippur. These kings concenlrate~l ttlleir sttention on Llle glorification of Babylon.

CIIIEFLY Y11031 NII'PUR. 31

but by restoring the former glory of Elror, the ancient national sanctnary ill Nipper, so deeply rooted in tlic hearts of the Babylonia~i people, and by stepping forward as the champions of tlie 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 elcmcnts. Supl~orted by the influential priesthood of N i l q ~ ~ ~ r and dreaded as daring

-

warriors by the discontented parties, the Cassites could lnonld and govern the desti- nies of Babylonia forl~early six hnadred years, until linally they were ovel.wheImed by new invztsions from the East and by the gl.eat irational ul~rising in the South, which resulted in placing the native dynasty of l'ashe on the throne of Babylon. The essential results to be drawn from the fifty-five votive inseriljtions of the Cassitc dyn;~sty published on I'lates 14-29, I have given in several articles in Zeitschrift

~ ' I W A s s y ~ ~ i o l o g i e h ~ ~ d i11:ly therefore confine myself to the following points. T l ~ c insc~iptions on PI. 8, Xo. 15, and PI 21, No. 43, are written on the obverse

and reverse of a tnblet in agate. Thc stone tells its own story. About 2750 B. C., tlie patcsi "of a city dedicated thc tablet to the goddess Ninna or Ishtar "for the life of Dnngi, the powerr111 cllampio~l, Jiil~g of Ur." Asterwards, possibly about 2285 B. C., i ~ t the time of the Elamite invasion, when Rodur-Nanlihrn~di laid hand on the temples of Aklcad and carried the image of the goddess Nan'? into Elam, the tnblet was also taken away ancl remained in the possession of the enemies until c. 1300 B. C. I<lu igal- zn (donbtless the second of the name'), after his conquest of Susa, b ~ o ~ ~ g l r t it baeL to Babylonia and 1)rescntecl it to Bcltis of Nippur. For over threc tllo~isand years it lay within the walls of Eliur, 11nti1 agai11 it became the spoil of invaders of Nipp~u.. This tinle it was ca1,ried far away to the modern """"Al,urri. Perhaps a later sl/ccr Xibrcct ce~bce'Z11~ will talte it bacli to the resnrrected sanctuary of Nippor. Iiuri- galza's i~isc~,iption on this tablet is of 11istoric;~l iml~ortance, because, for the first time, we learn fro111 this 1,ing'i own inscril~tions of' his successf~ll campsigll against

-

Elani,' in the conrse of' wl~ich he conquered even Snsa.' The cuneiform text reads : 1. IZurigalau 2. s l m ~ l iu~r~ t l z~n iash 3. r̂ XaLlcc sha '"" S l ~ ~ i s l ~ ~ u ' ~ . s1~1 ]Clamti"' 5. ikslzz~d- van 6 . unu "'"8lit (XIS- LLIL) 7. btltishu 5. anu 6rclrifiskic 9. i%ish , " l i~uigalzu , Icing of liarudniiiash, conclnered the 1)nlacc of Susa in Elnm and presented (this tablet) to Bclit, his mistress, for his life."

' Inscriptiun of IIadashmaoTurgn, PI, 84, Ko. ti:l, 1. 1 and 2.

' Cf. " Bibliograplry," 11, D, 11, I?. :'This ward stoail nppi~rentlp in one of tile losl lines at tho lower end of t h e tablet. ' Cf. Pincllcs, "An Early l'ablct of the Babylonian Ci,ronicl@," in R. F.', Vol. V, p. 109, col. 111, 10-18.

6 Tlie earliest mcntion of Suss in tile Xnhyluuian cnoelform lileratnre. Tlle nbsolulo proof for tire identity of Sllhsllid a.illl Shirki ( IV R.' 33, 40, h. JI R. 48, z9, b, a n d Delilzscl~, I'irradies, p. 32F), Sllaahni~ or Sht~shun, is impossi.

b les t prosent. It seems, however, scarcely possible tlmt ihallu shn SIL~LSIL(L sha Elamti can be anything else than

oyy? y u n?'>gpm@ (Dan. viii. 2). Tile nnnle was prohnbly pronoanced Sliiisha(n). Cf. also p. 15, uote 1 (end).

32 01~1) BABYLONIAN IYSCI~IPTIONS

Anotlicr inscriptioil l~ublished on the sanlc plate, Nos. 41 a ~ i d 46, was dalnagcd a t t l ~ e end of cach line when the scribe cut it from the bloclc of lapis l:rzuli,' ~ ~ h i c h Rurigalmi dedicated to BCl. I t reads: 1. A - ) ~ a " ' ~ l & l (Erb[-lil] ) 2. be-el ma-ti-a-ti be- [li-2sh,;] 3. Ku-[~] i -gal -zu ri-ia-urn iua-ram '"'"R6lit ?I" 4 . pa-Z- [shemu-zs """UPl?],"'To BFl, lord of the lands, his lord, ICurigalzu, the shep1ie1.d beloved by Belit, he who fcars (and) obeys BCl."

The cuneiform text, of the lapis lazuli disc on PI. '8, No. 61, proves the correct- ness of my conjecttire in Z. A. VII, pp. 305-318. The f o ~ ~ r t h character of 1. 3 is, Ilowever, not ZLS I sn1)1~0sed: l i a bnt fhd . ' Thc disc thus f i~r~lishcs us the new :lnd iuteresting writing kacldashnicc~z' instead of tlle hitherto kcidccshtnan.

No. 66 and 67 of 1'1. 25 arc thc obverse and reverse of the same fi;rg:.li~eiit of an

:gate ring. The dedicatiotl on it was apparently written by o ~ i c lting only, wbo, in need ol' sl~ace, inscribed both thc npper and lower side of his gift. A s the remnant of the

last charactcr of S o . 66 is donbtless to be completed to f in-[t l i~~gir-rub], the ideo- gram shcr~, standing before it, nlust bc thc title of a king, whose name ended in LIL (thc last character of ""'""EN-LIL or Bi.1). According to onr present linowledge of the rulers of the Cassite dynasty, the name can he read either hisdur-'""""EX- LILfi (cf. S o . 64) or Iiudasl~ntan-'""~~~E~1~-LIL (Xo. 65). The obverse of thc rii~g (No. 6 i ) contains part of :L nirme ending i11 [blcc-ri-icr[-c~s7~], which again can be completed either to S/i,r~gus7tnlti-Bu~~i11.s7~, the son of Bodur-""'""EJ-LIL, or' tc . . . . buriash (Xo. 68, col. 1, 5), the son of liaclnshrncc~~-'"'~~"~3N-LIL. As no in- scriptions of the former seem to have been found in Xippnr, aild the characters of Kos. 66 and 67 resemble those of 30. 68 more than of Yo. 64, I assign thc ring to the Icing mentioned in S o . 68, i. e., in all prohability Hadashman-Bnriash, who, according to 111 R. 4, No. 1, was a t mar with an Assyrian Icing.' The followi~lg

1 Cf. Hiiprecilt, "Zur 1,i~pislaauli Frilgo in, Baliyloniscilen," Z. A. BIII (io p1.int).

Brlinnow, 1. c., 5309. Cf. ?IIeissner, BDaitriige arum Allbabglonischen I'rLccrtrecibf, p. 113, No. Zl, 3.

'Uncertaill ; restored according to Brit. BIus., 51, 8-30, 9, 1. 8.0 (cf. Jcoseo, Schrader's li. B. 111, Part 1, p. 120):

~i- '&(sic! instead of Jensen's 'u)-u iLa~?.im i l~~Bil i t , pa l - l~u she-nzib-u i l ~ l - S h n m a s / & .

' Briionow, I. c., 2701. Soe also my "Nachtrag" in % A. VII, 1). 318.

VTllis is nut to be used in fdvor of Pinches' ideutifici~tio~~ of liaddash xitil gi~ddas7~ and gan(knn)-di~sh. I adhere

to Nhat I romarl'ed in Z . A. VII, p. 300, note 4, until Grc~ l~ l i~s l~ or Gnndasl', the founder of tilo Csssite dynasty, has

a c t ~ ~ a l l y been fo~ind ~ r i t t e n will, tile character lin (or I<&), or tile Narc1 i;ad(d)ash iu Cassite proper nalues like IZad- (d)ashmnn~Torgn, will, tilo value gn (or &a). C f Pi. 28, No. 68, col. I, 14, 15, d u n ~ u sag l~ad.nsI~-ma-an-~li~~~irE~Y.LIL, "( . . . . riasli) the first sou of Iiadnsllmau-EN-LII,." l l y writing di~inu Kc~-dd-asI~-rno-u?~-diii~i Bdl (Z. A. VII, 11.

300, note 3) is to bo corrected sccor<Iingly. ' (:e~ierally rend Ifudui..Bil. I t would be lilore ai~propriato to translitorete llim IZIIIIIII.-TUT~LI (see below). That

Ile n:ls king wiil be sliown in !ny article, " Dic Rrghnzong der Narnen aweier IZsssitenii6nigo," Z. A. VIlI (in print).

Fol. v;~~.ions obvious reasons otllcr possibililies liavc liecn ercl~tdcil as improbaliie.

T i l o co~ljecturc of i)ciitzscl~ (Ifossiia~, pi,. 10 s r q ; llommcl, G~sc i~ . , p. 437 seq.), that tho Assyrian kiug was

Sllalnlaneser I, is proved by the new cl!ronalogy n41ich I am able to establish for a, number of Cassitc kings. Cf.

below p. 57.

CHIEFLY XYOM NIPPUII. 33

is an attcmpt to restorc the legend according to the usual ph~.aseology of this class of inscriptions: Ol~verse, [D'":'"'A'n-Pil Kcc-ila-ash-71~u-nn,-.B]z~-~i-ici- [ash], Reverse, [dz~rnu (srrg) ICrc-du-ash,-mu-~n-"'~Z~~]-lil lt~gal Xu[-din,yir-mi' u-?nu- nu-sliuh], " T o B@l, his lord, 1CadasIima11-Buriash, (first) son of Iiadashman-EN- LIL, king of Babylon, presented it."

The question remains to be settled, whether the name of the father of l iadash- man-Buriash is to be rcad Kadashman-B@l, as has gcaert~lly been close,' or Kadash- m a n - E n l i l h r still in another way. The second reading ilecds no rcf~~tat ion. It is in itself impossible. T l ~ e first seems to me a t present irnpl~obable. For while thcre arc Babylonian propcr names which are conil~osed of Babylonian words and the name of n foreigu god,' tbcrc is no evidence that there were in use :~ny which contain a Cassitc word and a t the salne time the nallle of a Babylonian deity. The csaniplc cpotcd by Deiitzseh%honld be rcad Nazi-Shihu.' For this vcry reason 1 regard the correct prollulleiatio~~ of Iiadasl~maii-'""""BLT-LIL as being either I<adashman- Iiharhe%r ICadashman-Tnrgu," in othcr words the Cassite liing 1iad;rshmaa- """"ET--LIL may rcprcsent either of the two persons. Which of the t ~ v o is the more probable? There are two Cassites of' the name Iiadashman-Kharbc

to be considered. The one was the father of I<urigalzo I.' As, howcvel., there is no 1xoof that he was a icing,' we leavc him here out of co~lside~.ation, the more readily, as other reasons make his identification with I<adashman-""'°FEliV-LIL well-nigh impossible. The other I iadash~nan-Iiha~%e is entirely out of the question," as none of the six kings following the lattcr successively, according to List h: ends in . . . .

o. 9.. Dolitzsclr, Iiossiisl., p. 20 ; I'incl~es, 2'J~e Academy, September 5, 1891, p. 109, b, and last Iliipreclit, Z. A.

VII, p. 310. Hommel, Desc?~., 11. 433 : Ifa7.a-fi~lil.

" a. I., Sl~u[~an~una-a& idclirta (Doiitzsch, Iiossiier, pp, 18, 21, 28), lfashsli&-~~~rlin-c~~t~ (ih.).

" ICoesiicr, p. 18, note 1.

"or Cnss. SILikl6 = E ~ b y l . 5Iu.~d~lu cf. Dcl i t~scI~, li08sher, pp. 20, 21, 3!1. J*rom the few puMisliec1 docull~ents

i n ~ v h i c h Nazi-Shihn or menlbers of Itis funily (cf. the passages on p. 42) are montioued, it is evidetit tlmt this Cnssito fa~nily liveci in N o r t h ~ r n Rsl~ylunin nncl mas vcry prominent and iufluoutiul. Even Ncbuchadrozn~r I, sl~klilu ICasl~. shi, treated its chief with ilistil~ctian (F~eibrief, ccul. 11, 1 2 : lficlu Akknd). 111 viem of tho truo cllnracter (IIil-

precht, Z. A, p. 311, note 3) of theso.calle(1 "C~assito~Se~l~iticvocabulary " (Delitzsch, A7080ssiier, 17. 24 sty.), nud of w l ~ a t

Itas been said about the forn~ntion ofproper namositbo~.o, I I~elieve Nazi-Sllihn in V R. 44, 43a, to be the sanle person as the higl, dignitary who appears as the first witness in the "Freibrief " of Ncbuchadrczaar I.

For Iiharbe = B81 cf. Dclitzsch, Kousiie~, p. 23 ; for Turgo = B&l cf. Ililpreclrt, Z. A. VII, p. 316, noto 3, and

tho follamiog lines above. Cf. Wincklcr in Z A. 11, pp. 3V7-311 Against Deiitzsch, Uescl~. ("Ubersiclit"), WIN does not hesitate to number llitn among the Cassite rulers.

Tlle principle stated by Winckler in Z A. 11, 11. 310, 1. 7-10, is correct, but his identific:ition of Radashman- Be1 wit11 Iiadaslrmsn-KharI,e is impossible.

:14 OLI) BABYLOEIAX INSCRIPTIONS

rictsh, as is required.' That l'u7.y is another Cassite equivalent for the Babylonian Be1 (of Nippur), I have eadcavored to show in 2. A. VII, p. 316, note 3. But there

are other reasons for identifying Kadashman-Tnrgn with I i a d a s h m a n - " ' " " ' L I L :

(1) The cuneiform characters of the inscriptions of l i adashmaa-Torg on Plates 23, 24, are strikingly similar to thosc of X a d a s h m l t n - " i " i - L I L and especially liis son (Pl. 23). (2) The son of I<ada~hrnan-~ ' "~~ 'E i \~LIL bears l~rccisely the same title (PI. %, Xo. (58, col. I, (i), as I<adashman-Turgu (PI. 24, 1. 8).?

On P1. 28 we mect with the first personxl inscril~tion of Rarn?~zci~z-shum-u~z~r, -

contemporary of the Assyrian Iring, B?l-liudnr-ustu. The bt.icli legend is written in Snmcrian and reads : 1. Di"~"En-lil 2. l/.~qrtl ~ U T - ~ Z L T - T ~ 3. lugcil-a-mi-ir 4. "'""" Ramnrri?z-shum-u~ur 5. sibn s7~e-gn-bi (i. /;-a En-lil ''-a '7. sag-ush h'-k7~~-ra 8. 3-lcur e ki-uy-gh-a-ni 9. '"'9" al-za.-~ct-ta 10. mu-ZL~Z-?LC-TU, "TO H?l, lord of lands, his lord, Ramm2n shum-ns~u., his favorite shel~hcrd, :~dorner oS Xil~pur, chief of Ekrlr, built Ekur, liis hcloved house, with hriclts."

Winelder, following Saycc, " Iattcrly inclines to regard the Babylonian Icing " Iiamm211-shnm-na:iI.," in IlI It. 4, No. 5, ;t,s identical with the rolcr whose inscrip- tion has just been translated.' This, however, is utterly impossible. Sayce and Winclcler misread the name of the king mentioned in 111 R. According to t,he law

-

underlying the formati011 of Babylono-Assyrian personal proper names, the ctulieiform group Rarnrnn*~z-MU-~1~E~'iI~-IR can only he read Bnrnrn~in-mush~sl~i1., " Rammhll is

directing (rnling)."' This Icing lived hefore B ~ ~ r n a b ~ u i a s h and has uot even the name in common with thc above-give11 Ramm211-sh1un-n~nr.

' For liadasl1man-~~4oi~EN-LIL, himself king (PI. 25, No. R5), was the father of another king (PI. Z:, 2\70, 68,

col. I, 16), ending in . . . . riash (ibid., 1. 5).

"csides the persona! votive inscriptions of King Iindasllman-13ut.go, many tablets dated in his reign were found in Nippnr. I t is cortain that he was one of llle best koown princes of tile Cassito dynasty and ruled more tlmml fifteen years. I t seems, tilerefore, stl.aogo tliat his name, being entirely Cnssitc, s l ~ o u l ~ l ha re becn omittetl by the compiler of K. 4426 (V R. 44, 21-44, a. b). As soon ns we road tile naine io V R. 44, 20, n, Iiiidi~shman-Targu, ns I proposed above, thc difficiilly is removed. And, indeed, tilis reading finds now coufir>nation. All the nainos placed together by the compiler in V X.. 44, 25-44, are pnrcly Cassite. Thcrefore we aro aliliged to ~.cgard the irlcogram in tlre nnmc of Kadeshmiul-~lii~o1~E~Y-LIL, wliicli is cxl,lainell by its Assyrian equivalent Tuloulti-Bdl in the t.iglrt columo, as Cassitc

in the left colown. That ((i7'liii.Efl-LIL \\-as ]lot t~rono~lnced Iillarbe seems, apsrt from the above-givcn reasons.

tu be indicaterlby the fact t i n t Iiiiarbe in V R. 4 4 S3 a (i.e., in the left colnmn) is written phonetically lfhar-be. Prom names like l i~a?bi-S?iil~u (IV R.' 34. No. 2, 1. 5, 141, "B8I (=tho lord) is Iiar~loL," we may infer that tlro re;~1 mean.

ing of Iiharloi n-as sornetlling like "lord." Tlie use of Iilrnrbi for the name of n certain gad, resembles, thercforc,

closely that of ~lz~~!iii.B~V ill tile later Babylo~li:m time (cf. Tielo, Geseh., p. 638). Turgu on tho otller hand seelns to have been the Ei.1 of tile Cassites, i. e . , cnactly col.rcs~,oniling in his rani< t,o tllc di~,r/ii.E~v.LIL or R8l of Nippllr, tllo

highest god of their P ;~n t l~eun . R. P.', Val. 11, p. 207, note 1 (cf. TToi. I, p. 16).

' Gesch., 11. 102 (cf., liowever, p ~ . 88, note, nud 157). 5Cf. u-s?~esl~~s?~e~?'u , Sanll. Iiuy. 2, 31.

CHIEFLY FlLORZ NIPPUR. 35

The brick legend 011 PI. 29 was already pnblishcd by Pinches i113Tehraica, Vol. VT, pp. 55-58. I need makc 110 apology for repnblislii~~g it hcre, as Mr. Piaches' edition, I am sorry to say, is ol' little usc, the cuneiform text and translation offered by him being nnfortunately incorrect in all essential points. The legend was stamped "by means of a wooden block, on thc brick." The stamp, however, having becn carved very shallowly, the inscription, " thong11 impressed evenly," is not very distinct on any of the many hundreds of briclis which were fo1111d.' Besides, the surface is covered "with a thin deposit, wliich adds to the difficulty of deciphering the in- scription." Notwithstanding all this, I did not deem it necessary to mark any of its caneiform charactcrs as donbtfnl. My copy was made after a long and careful s t ~ ~ d y of each character, and especial attention was paid to cvery detail. Certaio coneiform chai.acters could not be recognized distinctly on the original except in the light immediately preceding snnrise, the best time for copying diffic~llt cnnciform in- scriptions. On the following points I am obliged to differ from Mr. Pinches :

1. PincIles : "The date of this inscription is uncertain. Judging fi-om the style of the charactcrs, i t should be about 1500 K. C., bnt it may bc as early as 2S00 B. C." I n the present writer's opinioi~ the iiiscril~tion belongs to one of the last rulers of the Cassite dynasty. For paleographic reasons i t cannot be older than 1250 13. C., and in Fact belongs to a lting who rolcd c. 1165 B. C.

2. Pinches transliterates the name of the ruler (1. 4) " Nin-Dobba," rcgards its bearer to be a lady, and adds, tlie inscription "is tho only tes t of u qneeu of Meso- potamia known." Mr. Pinches should have been the more careful in i~ltrodncing this regent us a female to A~syr io lo~ i s t s . I read I. 4 Mili-fl7uilc7~~ (see below) and regard this person as being the well-known Cassite liing who ruled c. 1171-1157 13. C.

3. The first character in 1. 5 is, according to Mr. Pinches, nin, "lady," while in reality the tes t gives siba, "shephc~~d."

4. Mr. I'inches reads (1.6) tuyal Ega, " qneen of Ega," and adds, " Ega is probably another name for this city [Nipp~lr], or for a part of it." The phrase thus misunder- stood by Mr. Pinches is the very common title l tyal ly (P)' -gee, "the powerful king."

The inscription in question reads as follows: 1. n " ' - l i l - Z a ( l ) 2. lugctl kur- kur-ra 3. lugul-a-xi-ir 4. "" '~" 'Mi l i - '~ i "~ i iX~i l~~~ 5. sibcc she-gu-bi 6. tugul lig (?) -ga 7. lugal ub-dn tab-tab-ha 8. E - k w 9. e-ki-clg-yil-a-ni 10. ""'R"al-u~-ra-ta 11. mob-?in-na-~.u, " To BC.1, lord of lands, his lord, Mili-Shikhu, his favorite shep- herd, powerful king, king of the four quarters of the earth, built Eknr, his beloved house, with bricks."

'Cf. "Table of Colltent~."

'densen in Z. A, I, p. 396, note 4.

36 OLI) BABYLONIAN INSCRIl'TIONS

My reasons for identitying the name ill I. 4 with that oS Mili-Shilrlin are as fol- lows: (1) The liing mnst lrave lived after R ; L ~ I ~ ~ I I - S ~ I ~ I I I - L I ~ I I ~ , because a few bricks of the latter ' were found ill the l~latform of the temple erected hy him.' (2) Paleo-

graphic reasons point to t l ~ e end of the Cassite dynasty as tlie date of his iaseription. Apart from a certain difference of appearance between Ramrn$n-sli~~n~-ugt~r's legend and that of the king in question, the one having been inscribed, tlie other stdmped, there is a decided similarity bct\vcc.t~ the characters of the two inscriptions. (3) One of the titles (I. 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, otllerw. lo), in other words, Y (otherw. 7) lines are absolutely identical. Hence i t follows that the king in qi~estion m ~ i s t hsvc ruled not long after Ramn1211-shnm-ugnr ; was possibly his snc- cessor. (4) This result is corroborated by an alrslysis of the first half of 1. 4. The determinative dingir is not onfrequently found befhre the names of Cassite Icings.' The secol~d and third cl~aractcrs are to be read X1i-d (libbu)' + ba. The abse~lce of the two ill~ier wedges in X I I d is doe to the shallowness with ~vhich the characters of the stamp were carved. They are found on anothcr (badly preserved) brick, of the same liing, thr: lcgclld of wllich was written with the hand, and differs slightly in othcr respects." A s the inscription is written in Sumerian, the syllable bu indicates that the Sn~iicrian value of the preceding sign ended i11 h, in other words, was the dialectic form of a word ending in y-probably s7iug. A s the personal proper names occarl,i~ig in thc later S~uncrian inscriptiol~s are, as a rule, not to he rend Snmevian, hut as they were actually prono~urccd,'' we read the ideogram (shaba) with one of its common Scmitie equivalents, icirbu, libkic, mil*/&, 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 nanles 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 he an ideogram for the god Marduk, or his Cassitc equivalent Shilthu, and read the whole name accordingly Mili-Shithu.

The following list is a11 attempt a t restoring part of the brolren List b, and giv- ing the chronology and s~iceession of the last twenty-foor ltings of the Cassite

'Togetller with a few of Ur~Ninib, Rurigalzo, and onc of Bur-Sin I 2Cf. above, p. 27, and "Tithlo of Contents," PI. 29, No. 82.

:'Cf. Hilprecht in Z. A. VII, pp. 308-310.

'Cf. Brdnnorv, 1. c., 7083.

Cf. Vol. I, Pavt 2.

OCf. also Jensen in Scilmder's K, 11. 111, Par t 1, p. 117, notes 0-0. 7 Cf. Driinuow, 1. c., 7985-1001.

CHIEFLY 1"1(0N NIl'l'U K. 37

dynasty, which ruled over Babylollia for 576 years.' My reasons for changing the

generally accepted order of several of these Icings will be formd in a special article. If the date which I assigned to the first rulers of the Pashc dynasty be accepted, my chronology frorn K~~r iga lzu I1 to B$l-shorn-iddina I1 must be regarded as abso- Il~tely certain. As the rtilers between Barnabtuiash and Ku1.igalzu I1 are well known, it is also settled beyond donbt that Shagashalti-Bu~.iash lived before Ruri- g a l z ~ ~ 1. Nabuna'id's statements concerning the ch~.onology of Sargon I, Hammn- rabi, Burns-Bnriash, and Shagaslialti-H~uiash must bc regarded as only approxi~nate dates. The events recorded rnay have occurred at ally time in the century before or after the year given.' Sennacherib's statement concerning Tali~llti-Xinib's cylinder (600 years) is likewise to be tinderstood in a broad sense.

13. Ramm?tn-innshCshir5 . . . . . . c.1442-1423 (about twenty years). 14. Kallima(?)-Sin . . . . . . . . . . c. 1422-1408 (about fifteen ycars). 15. Knd~u-Turgri I . . . . . . . . . . c. 1407-1393 (about fifteen years?). 16. Shagashalti-Buriilsh (his son) . c. 1392-1373 (about twenty year^). 17. ICurigalzu I (son of Kadash-

man-Iil~arbe) . . . . . . . . . c. 1372-1348 (aboot twenty-five years). 18. Iiara-illdasll (his older son?)' . c.1347-1343 (aboat five ycars?). 19. Borna-Bnriash (son of' 17) . . c.1342-1318 (about twcnty-five years). 20. Kara-Bhardash (son of 18) . . c.1317-1308 (abont ten ycars).

21. Nazi-bugash (osurper)! . . . . c. 1307 (about one year). 22. Knrigalzn T I (son of 19) . . . . 1306-1284 (nearly twenty-three ycars). 23. Nazi-3far1ittash (his son) . . . 1284-1258 (twenty-six years). 2L Kadashman-llarga (his son)'. . 1257-1241 (seventeen years). 25. Radashn~a~l-Bnriasl (his son) . 1240-1239 (two years). 26. Is-am-me . . . . t i . . . . . . . 1238-1233 (six years). 27. Shagashalti-ShuriashS . . . . . . 1232-1220 (thirteen years).

' I regard Pciser's doubts as to the eol.rectness of tllc 576 years (Z A. TI, p. 207 sey.) as unnecessary. Tlirougi~

tile excavntionsnt Nippur weare enabled to substantiate part of the stst,emcnts given as to this dynasty in the list. l'ilis

fact teaches us P'slinu lenle! ?An<l in a sentence like "wllo built 700 years bcfare Bur~laburiasll," we hnve to malrr oven a grenter allownnce,

as we do not know whicl~ approximate date Nabuna'id hail in micd in connection with the reign of Burni~buriash. ' He may have lived n t an earlier date.

'Generally rend Kudur-B8l. Cf. above, p. 32 sap.

STl~e ssmo ns I<ar.indash, son-in-law of ~\sl>ur-uballit, king of Assyria. Cf. R. P.5 Vol.V, p. 107, 1. 5, G, 12.

LCalled Su-zigash in R. P 2 , Vol. V, p. 107, I . 10, 13. 'Cf. Hilprccl~t in Z . A. VII, 11. 311 (cf. PI. 23, No. 61). The date t l~e ro assigned to Rndashman-Turgu (c. 1540

13. C.) is to he correcteii according lo tllitt given above. For his identification with I<ailasI~man-~"Yif'EN~LII, see

above, p. 33 sap. 8Cf. above, p. 11.

38 OLD BABYI.ONIAN INSCRIPTIOXS

28. Bibe[iashn] (his son) ' . . . . . . 1219-1211 (nine years). 29. B61-sham-iddina I . . . . . . . . 1210-1209 (onc year and a half). 30. Kadashman-Iiharbc . . . . . . . 1209-1208 (one year and a half). 31. Rsn~nlfin-shnm-iddill . . . . . . 1207-1202 (six years). 32. Ramm3n-shnm-us1u . . . . . . . 1201-1172 (thirty years). 33. Mili-Shikhu (his son)'. . . . . . 1171-1157 (fifteen years). 34. Marcluli-abal-idtiina (his s o ~ i ) . 1156-1144 (thirteen yeavs). 35. Zanx~ma-shurn-iddin;1 . . . . . . 1143 (one gear). 36. BG1-shum-iddina 11" . . . . . .. 1142-1140 (three years). The last 24 kings = c. 303 years; thc first 4 icings = 68 years; the remaining 8

l i i~lgs = 205 years and 9 inonths (each 25-26 years in nveragc '). Total, 36 1ci11gs = 576 years and nine months.

THE D Y N A S T Y OF P A S I I E ?

Thc cnneiform tablet poblishcd on PI. 30 nnd 31 forms a part of the collectioll J S., purchased by the Expcciition from Joseph Shemtob' for the University of Penn- sylvania, Ju ly 21, 1888. Unfortunately i t is impossible to ascertain with certainty where the stone tablet was fonnd.' I n regard to its size and mineralogical cl~aracter it closely resembles the "black stone of Za'aleh," to be found in I R. (56, with which i t also has much in common as to its contents. Both belong to the class of the so- called ~ u ~ u T ~ ' ? L inscriptions.@ A piece of gro~uld situated in the laud of Kaldi, in the province of Bit-Sinm3gir (I, 1, 2), which for many years (1, 3-8) had been in pos- session of the Family of a certain NahR-shom-iddiaa (I, 15) bnt had been unlawfi~lly rednced in size by Eltarra-il~isha, a t that time governor of Bit-Sinmagir (I, 9-15), was ~111on the complaint of the owner (I, 16-11, 5) restored to its original extent by

'Idonticnl wit11 S. 2106, 1. 9. See above, 11. 11. 2Cf. Uelser in U . A. 11, p. 107, 1. 31.

'Cf. R. P2, Vol. V, p. 111, 1. 1 4 ; p. 111, 1. 16. Cf. also below, p. 41. "uch long reigns appear in no way improbable when compared with tho longer reigns of fifteen rnlers of the

first and second dynasties of Babylou. Sayce (R. P2, V01. I, p. 17, note 3) regards tllis city as ideutical with Isin and Patesi. Cf. I1 R. 53, 13a.

'' Cf. Rarper, IIeleDraicr' V, pp. 7476.

" Cf. "Table ofcontents," PI. 30, 31. a I reckon as such not only "tllose Babylonian documents ~ l l i ~ l l are insc~ibed on blocks of stone not niwnys quite

regularly hewn" (Belser, B. A. 11, p. I l l ) , but hlso those whicli, like ours and the Za'aleh stone, 'wore kept within

doors and possibly as duplicstes of the '~stblos," wllich were nntnrally oxposed to destructive inflilences, so that in disputes concerning boundaries tiley ~niglit f i~ rn i s i~ the basis far II legal decision.

CHIEFLY FIlOM NIPPUIC. 39

Bi.l-n5din-al>lri, king of Babylon, in the fourth year of his reign (11, 6-10). Thc document closes with a blessing for the official who in time to come shall respect the decision (11, 11-20), and with a curse against him who shall remove the boundary again (11, 21-24).

Apart from thc fact that the stone furnishes us with the name of one of the early kings of the " Sea-land," with that of a hitherto lunknown l>rovincc or colinty of tlic land of Icaldi,' a ~ i d with other details of interest, it is or the greatest importance for its chronological bcarings. For the following reasons, the stone must be assigned to the Pashe dynasty : (I) The cuneiform charaetcrs are those which a,rc characteris- tic of tlic documents of that period, and especially tbcy rcscmble those of the charter (F~eihriq') of' Nebnchadrezzar 1.' (2) Eliarra-ilcislia, son of Ea-iddina, is me~itioned as an official9oth on our stonc (I, 10, 11 ; 11, 6) and on that of Za'aleh (11, 6). From this it follows that our stone belongs to about the same t i~i lc :IS thc othcr which bears the date of tlie first ycar of King Mardnirn2dina1_1@. (3) But we are able to fix the date of our sto~ic even morc cxactly from the statement in col. I, 7-15, according to which the piece of lalid in question was in l)osscssion of the farnily of Nnbil-shnm-iddina until the time of Nebi~chadrczzsi I, but in the foruth ycar of King B@ln2dinaplu was unlawf~illy encro:~ched ul1o11 by the governor, Elcaris-ilctsha. The

result naturally is that tllc stone dates from the reign of' B6ln2dinaplo, and that the latter was the immediate successor of Kcbuchadrczzar I. This proves, a t the same

time, that the snpposition made by TVinclcler ' and Delitzsch,' that Mardukn;di~lal$ was the immediate succcssor of Neb~ichadrezza~ I, is wrong, and that the order is rather Nebochadrezzar I, B$lnfidinapIu, Mard~ikn?~dina1_1@.

The q ~ ~ e s t i o n arises, W h a t place must bc assigned to this group of three ltings in the dynasty of Pashc? This, i l l my opinion, can he answered with entire certainty. For although the Baby1oni:~n list" has been broken off at the very place mhcre tho names of the rulers of this dynasty once stood, yet the cliaracters which rcmain of the last threc kings serve us in solving the clucbtion. Of tlie five bnown kings of this dy- nasty, 1. Nebachadrezzar I, 2. B?ln2dinaplu, 3. l\lardokn?dini~~C, 4. Mardnlcshfipik- zirim (sic!) (not A1ardnkt;bikzirim)' 5. Rarnm2n~pl~1iddina, nolie of them fit into the

LDelitrsclr, Pc~rndies, 11. 203np.; Wincl<lc~., U,~tcrs., 11. 51 sey.

'i Cf. IIilprecllt, F?eihrirfSebzakailizrzia's I, nirr l V R. 55-57.

: 'On our stone hc appears as "gavcrnor of liit-Sinnrinlr ;" oil tlrat of Za'alell ns "gorerllor of tlie city of Ishin ;" so that he probably liiirl bccn tmnsferrcd on tllo accession of ~ l n r r l u 1 ~ - n x d i n - n w , or possilily a little earlier. Tlie 1iI.e.

vio~ls "governor of Isllin" was Sll;nnnsll~n%~lin slrulrru, son of Attn~ililrrln (cf. Freib~ief 1YeDul:irili~cznr's I, col. ii, 17). vm~sen., 91;. aesdh., 93.

"Winckler, Uitlws., p. 146 s r g .

' .4 cylinder fragment of this king, i n l~ussession o i 311.. Tttlcott Wiili;~ms, of Pl~i ladel~hia , mnsimiislilerete(l ~xnii translated in 5. A. IV, 301-323. Paleograpllic reasons :u.e rlcciaivo in fixing tile dnto of this cylinder. IIr. Willinrns

has given me his liincl pcrmissioll to publish the cuneiforni tcxt in thc secolld psrt ofthe present volume. Cf. below, p. 44.

40 OLD BABYLONIAN IXSCI:IPTIONS

remaining characters of'the last three names of the dynasty. It follows, thereforc, that a11 the five nulst have reigncd before these. A s the kings which have heen numbered 4 and 5 arc ltnown to have been successors of Mardaka%dinahi?, i t lilicwise 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, thercforc, thc founder of the Pashc dynasty. To this two objections may be offercd: (1) That the traces of thc cnnciform characters which follow the number of the years in the l i s t b do not favor the rending of iVnbI?; (2) that Sayce,' on the evidence furnished by the "Early Tablet of the Babylonian Chroniclc,"' col. IV, 17, claims that place in the list for a lting ZZumminu-shn~ru [or shum] "iddinci. I n reply to this the fol- lowing is to be said :

1. Scholars have adhcrcd too closely to the view that the mutilated begin- ning of the first linc of the List b contains after ilu traccs of tllc sign the

ideogram for the god Marduli. Winckler, in his edition or the list, cuts loose from this assumption, and givcs as ccrtain only i lu . This variation from the carefi~lly guarded tradition is snyported by Bezold's remark' that "a t this point the tnblct is in a most lamelltable condition." Thc latter, however, seems to recognize traccs of two other wedges immediately following. Bn t the chief probicm is whether

bcncath the two horizontal wedges of ilu, there can be seen a small horizontal wcdgc -

so that the sign can be completed to the combination of i lu and AG,"he ideogram f o ~ Nubi?. From thc fact that all those who have examined the list personally a1.c silent on this point I infer that the tablet a t this place is too illdistinct to permit ally definite conclnsion. Then, howcver, there is notlling in the remaining traces that forhids the rending oS Ancibii instcad of Nardali.

2. Fro111 what wc know fro111 the scanty cuneiform aceoonts,' it is clcar that the last years of the Cassite dynasty were a time of war and political disturbance, and that it was the wealtncss of its last representative which fi~roished the opportuliity for its own overthrow and for the rise of the house of Pashe. N o matter what verb

may have stood in the effaced passage R. P.; Vol. Y, p. 112, 1. lG , ' the supposition

' R. P.', Vol. V, p. 112, note I.

' R. P.?, Vol. V, pp. 106-114.

The reading of the middle cht~rnctor seeus Lo be doablfi~l. 1Ir. Pincllcs\\~ould rendor il grei~t service to Ass>-rial- ogists by pnblishing tlleexnct cuneifbr~ll text at an early date.

" Briinnow, 1. c., 10834.

l%. 8. IV, p. 317, note 1.

"Jlriinuo\v, 1. c., 2756. C f IIomniel, Geseh., p. 448.

' Cf. cspccialiy R. P,', TTol. V, pp. 111, 112, 1. 14-22.

a I favor umashshir, "hc left," instead of " l ~ e rono~u~ceil" or "abilicnted " (Piucllos). Cf. however, Tiele, 1. c.,

p. 165.

CIIIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 41

of Sayce, that line 17 contains the name of the second iring of thc Pashe dynasty, seems to me improbable, since the samc Elamite king, Ki~iin-K7~utrutash,' who already had attacked Akkad in the time of BGlshnmiddina, is again the assailant in this passage. I f Sayce were right, this Elsmite would have made his second incorsion into Aklrad about twcnty years after the first. This in itself is l>ossible, but it is made less proba- ble by the expression " Raniinknu-shorn-iddills ret~wncd," which appat.ently co~lllects this section closely to that which precedes. Besides it will be noticed that Rammi- no-shum-iddina does not bear the title of king, as BClshnmiddina. It seems morc

probable, therefore, to see in Ramm2nn-sh~~m-iddina, thc unfort~ulate son (or possi- bly allother relative) of BFlshumiddina, who "returned" from the place to which B6lsbumiddina or his family had fled, in order to take possession of the throne as his lawf111 inheritance.

This leads me to the discossion of the reasons for regarding Nebuchadrezzar I as tllc foullder of the Pashe dynast,y.

1. It needs no proof that a t a time when a country is harried by a powerful enemy? and a descendant of illostrioos ancestors pots forward claims to the crown, which are based on historic rights, a nsnrper who is to found a ncw dynasty must d is t ing~~ish liimself by eminent courage and ability. S ~ ~ c l l an able ~~o le r , who, -

according to onr present lrnowledge, surpassed in pre~minence all the other lrings of his dynasty, Nebochadrezzar I is certified to have been. H c condncted s~~ecessf i~l ly

the wars against Elarn, the hereditary enemy of Babylon in the East, turned his arms victoriously against the >Tort11 by " c a s ~ i n g down thc mighty Lulubman," and marched, as no other Babyloniall Iting for centnrics had ventured, conqueringi~lto Syria.

2. I t is worthy of notice that both the docnments bcaring his name are written in coilnection with his soccessf~~l conflict with Elan]. I l i s wars with this country, therefore, must have been especially important, perilous and of long doration.' Since we have learned from Pinches' rccent pnblication of the Babylonian Chronicle (col. IV, 1. 14-22) that the Elamites toolc advantage of the wealrness of the last Cassite king to devastate Northern and Southern Babylonia, the campaigns of Nebochadrez- zar I against Elam become of especial significance. A s 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 Alrkad," and restoring quiet and peace to his own conntry.

'This and not Iihut7.1~ icna or Iilcut~udis7~ (pinches, 1. o., pp. 111-113) is the probable reading. For the value task

of the character in question see IIilprccht in Z . A. VII, 1,~. 300, 310, 314. T l ~ e narno meana "sulrject (servant) of the

god I<butrutash" (cf. god fi1;~rhtash).

". F.5 Vol. V, pp. 111 sey.

" Wincklel; Oesch., 11. OF.

' Hilprecht, Freibrief, cool. I, 13.

43 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCI~IPTIONS

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, Shamnsh mitishu, "the Sun of his land ;" or mushammihu ~~jshishu, "he who makes prosperous his people ;" 7 ~ t f s i ~ kudlir&ti, mz~l;:inu abl8,l "he who protects the boundaries, establishes (meas~ired) tmcts of land;" sltai. Icinciti s7~u din misha~i idinu, "the king of the right, he who judges a righteons judgment ; " all arc titles which probably refer to the fact that just before the reign of Nebnchadrczzar 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 strongcr superseded law and order, while, at the same time, the bonn-

daries of the empire mere constantly invaded by powei.fi11 enemies ; in other words, anarchy as we lii~ow it existed in Babylonia at the close of the reign of BClshr~m- iddina. The significant title, sl~cililzc Kas7~shi, "the conqneror of the Cassites," acquires doubtless, in this connection, the significance of an allnsion 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 bonndary stone IV R.: 38, which is dated in the time of Merodachbala- dan I, mentions the house (1, 10) and the son (11, 34, 35) of a certain Nazi-Shilchu, while in the "Freibrief" of Nebuchadrezzar I, a certain Nazi-Shikha is named as a

high dignitary, Eulu AEkud. In view of the rare occnrrence of this name in Baby- lonian literature "t is na t~ua l to regard the two bearers of the same name as identi- cal. This identification, howerer, is possible only if Nebochadrezzar I reigned not long after Me~odachbaladai I,4 i. e., if he, as fo~lndcr of the Pashe dynasty, came into power some four years after the latter's death.

' I formerly transliterated this word apli (as Peiser still dues in Schmder's Ii. D, 111, h r t 1, p. 1G1). But siucc

1880 I have cl~anged my view and s~tbstitute~l tlre above. As the ward stands parallel to kudcriti, it must have a

similar meaning. In spite of nalqhalu, 11 K. 22, 29, b, o., oh2 is to be compnrcrl wit11 the Hebrew,'i ln wliicll, in view of the Ethiopic and Arabic ?ah1 has I?. Cf. also Delitasch, V8~tcrhz~ch, p. 37, no. 30. I n view of the title above

quoted it docs not seem improb;~ble that Nebnchadreeznr I sssomec! his lrighly si&lificant nsmc, " Nebo, protect the boundary," only after his usurpation. Another i n t e r p r e t ~ t i o ~ ~ of tllc nillie, "Nehu, pratoct (thy) servant," llns

rocently boen oiFeret1 by Jiigcr (13. A. I, 471, note 5). But wllere is the "tlry " ? Tllc proper names loudu?'~~ ; ~ n d

hirlinnzc, quoted by Jiiger, (Lo.) , are not to be regarded as exclu~i~ations but as abbreviations af origiually looser names.

As the middle part of the nsnle of Nob~~cl~atlrezzar is vritten either l<t~durru or l c i id tw~i (Bezold, Bobgloi~isck-As~yl.isc110 Litevatzw, p. 120), or k u c l t ~ ~ ~ o (PI. 32, col. 11, 7, of the present volume), it cannot mean "my boundary," as I formerly inteil,retecl (li'veibrief, 1). viii, note I), but " tllo boundary." Cf. my rcmarl;s in TIL~ Sxndny SoTLool Tiri~ss,

February 20,1802, p. 115, uote 3.

Wf. Hommel, Gesoh., p. 451.

Cf. col. TI, 18 of tlre boundnry stone (publisl~otl by Bclscr in B. A. 11, ~q'. 171-185), mllich fuvnislles us dntn from the time of the kiugs Ninib-kv~d&~i-t~pt~~ and N~~b~.m~akin-~~plu. For ~ I Y tmnsliternt,ion nnd the forlllation of tlle

name, cf. above, p. 33 and note 5.

*For as tlie son of N~zi-Shiklm who appenrs ns n witness under hIcrodacl~baladan I, was already iu possessioll of

the Important Office of a sulcailu, his father must have been adva~uced in ycars.

CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 4.7

5. The second king of the Pnshe dynasty, according to List b, reigned only six years. And indeed, \vhile thc titles and coilq~~ests of Nebochadrezzar I in his "Frei- brief" imply a coml~arativcly long reign, thcre arc indications that his immediate successor, B&lnkdi~ialjlu, rnled but a short time. This does not necessarily follow from the circumstance that thc document on Plates 30 and 31 is dated in the fourth year of his reign; bnt from the fact that Tkb-ashkp-Mardulr,' son of Esagil- z&,' already mentioned under Nebnchadrezzar I as governor of Halwkn, appears again as sukallz~ in the first year of Marduk-nRdin-a@, i. e., about twenty years later; for i t is very unlikely that the same person occupied a high and rcsponsiblc position under three successive ltings, if both of the former two had reigned a long period.

6. Finally this assumption e ~ ~ a b l e s us in the simplest way to dispose of certain chronological difficulties, upon which I cannot enter into details herc (cf. e. q. Z. A. 111, p. 2GO).

The statenlent of Sen~iacherib~~f~~rnishes us with a definite datum for the chronol- ogy of the Pashe dynasty. A s it seems most natural to connect the carrying off of the images of the gods of Ekallkti, with Marduknkdinah&'s victory over Assyria, in the tenth year of his reign,' we obtain 1107 13. C. as the tenth year of that iring's rule, and 1116 B. C. as the year of his accession to the throne. I n accordance with what has been said above, Nebaehadrezzar I reigned 1139-1123 B. C.,' and B61-nRdin- aplu in 1122-1117 B. C.

A word remains to be said as to the length of the period cove~ed 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 siml~le calculation." Thc number of twelve years for the seventh king of this dynasty, assumed by Tiele

'The reading ~nbu-~i'Pu-~Ialarurlu~, "A beneficent king is DIsrduk," preferred by Tiele (Geso/c., 1). 101, note I ) ,

instead of that given above (and first proposed by Oppert and MCnnut in Docun~cnts Jwiriiyues), nceds no refutstion. TW-aship-&la~dzbk is the only possible anc and means "Goarl is the exorcism of Marduk." The L'ailloz~ rle iliiei~azi%

upon n.hicli TiLb-nsl~hp-Mir~~Zuk, apparently not so far advanced in yezrrs, liliewise appears, belongs to the reign of

Nebnchadrezzar I or of B&luBdinaplu (cf. Tiele, 1. c., p. 161, and Hommcl, Gesci~., pp. 454, 450).

'That EsagilzEr is identical wit11 the Ina-Escgi1i.d~ of the Ze'alell stone (col. 11, la) , Was sllown in my commcn- tary on the "Freibrief Nebokadnezar's I," in 1882, which at the time was not printed because of a two years' illness. At present the proof of their identity is unnecessary. Cf. l3tblbar-s7lur+i-iddina, 111 R. 43, col. I, 29, and Ina-Eulbnr-

shuvgi-iddina, V R. 60, col. I, 29. Cf also Delitzsch, Kossiiev, p. 16 (ef. however Gesch., " Ubersicht "). To a dif-

ferent efect Jeremias in B. A. I, 1311. 210, 280 ; and Peiser in Schradcr's IL B. 111, Part 1, p. 117. Baoias, 48-50. "Ramrn8.n and Sala, the gods of the city of Ekalliti, which &lardukn&dinah_L?, king of Akkad,

at the time of Tiglath-Pilesor, king of Assyria, carried off and brousht to Babylon, 1 carried out of Babylon 418 years

later, and brought them back to Elrall8.ti, to their l~lace,"i. e., in the year B. C. 689, wllen Sanlieribconqliered Bnbylon. ' Cf. 111, R. 43, col. I, 5, 27, 28.

This calculation confirms strikingly the ycnr 1130 R. C., which I gave as the spproxinlate date of his "Frei-

brief" in 1883. 2. A. VI, p. 268 sey.

44 OLD B A B Y L O N I A N INSCRIPTIONS CHTEH'LY FROM NIPPUR.

( I . c., p. 111) and favored by Delitzsch,' finds no support in Winclclcr's edition and besides does not suffice to solve the chronological difficulty. As according to Peiscr ( I . c.) the passage is much effaced, %11d as his proposed reading, 60 t- 60 + 12 = 132 years, is the most simple and probable' solutiou of the existing difficulty, I accept it and accordingly construct the following table :

1. Nebachadrezzar I, . . 1139-1123 (seventeen years). 2. B&l-nadin-aplu, . . . . 1122-1117) (six years). 3. Marduk-nfidin-ah?, . . 11lG-c. 1102 (c. fifteen, at least ten, years). 4. Marduk-shapik-zirim,' 1 5. RammAn-aplu-iddiIla, 1 c. 1101-1053 (forty-nine years).

i 6-7. Two missing icings, 1 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . 1052-1031 (twenty-two years). 9. Marduk-bCl . . . . . , . 1030-1029 (one year and six montlis).

10. Marduk-z@r . . . . . , . 1029-1016 (thirteen years). 11. Nabfi-shum . . . . . , . 1016-1007 (ni~ie years).

Total one hundred and thirty-two years and six months.

"Anhang" to his Geschichte. I t is to be regretted that Winckler ilas not indicated the actual condition of tile passage by slracling the enaced

portions of the cliamcters. Cf. also Wincklcr, Gesc7~., 1,. 329. note 17. Another possibility (that GO + 10 +- 10 + 2 =8? stood originally

there) is loss probable for various rcssons.

Thisname has been transliterated Hardr~k-sh~'~~ik-zi!r.~nilli (Tiele, RoscR., p. 155 ; Delitzsclt, Oesch., "Ubersicht ")

or 1Wardi~k-si~apik-ku1.1a1 (Winckler, f3escli., p. 09). I regard but11 transliterations as Incorrect, aud would substitute

that given above for the follon.ing reasons : (1) The cylinder fragment publislled by Dr. Jastrow (cf. above, 11. 31, note 7) was uofortunately mis,~n~!erstoori by the latter and misread in various passages. Having eraminecl tlie frag-

lnont carefi~lly, I find that the old Babylonian character transliterated la by Jastrow is distioctly tho sign sha in tlle form so characteristic for tlre documents of tho Pashe dynasty. T l ~ o unme can only he read .+Iarduk.slLipil:-zi-riii?nn (2) This correct reatling is important in connection with the transliteration of the name of RammAn.apiu-iddina's pre-

decessor. I t is in itself improbable that two rulers of a Hnbylonian dynasty of elcvon 1-ings bore names almost (if not wl~olly) identical. The thuught forces itself upon ollr mint1 tllut Mardu1;-sl~Xpil<.zirim is the s ~ n l e person as tlie Iring wllose name was heretofore genernlly read ~Iardul~-s l r~~1l l i -z2r-1n~t i , Thnt at least tliese two names are identical is

certain. Tile lnst clraracter of the latter l~nmo (rWA2: IIriinnow, 1. c., 1386) v a s oitller erroneously read by tho Assyri-

ologists wlio copied tile so-called "syncllronistic Ilistory," or by the Assyriaucompiler who used a Babylonian original, instead of tile cl~nractor RIJI (Briinnow, I. c., 8867). For it is well known anmng Assyriologists t l~a t the two cliarnc- ters are nearly irleutical in the later-middle : ~ n d the latest periods of l+nbyloninn cuneiform writing. I n consideration

of this Fact, and in view of the phonetic writing z i l i - im on tlke cyliniles fragment, I uul~esitntlngly resd the name in question either phonctlcally iWard~~/o.sh~pi1;-~i~~-rim, or i,leograpl~icnlly (plus phonetic conlplement) ~?I~brdz~I~-shi?piii-

( ) The king, &DIrduk-t2hik-ziri1n, intl.oduced by Dr. Jastrow and accepted by Peiser (Sclirnder's II. B. 111, Part 1, p. 102 sap.) as an llitherto unicuomn ruler of tlie Paslle dynasty thus disappears. As to my otllcr corrections of certain readings offered by Dr. Jastrow In connection wit11 the cylinder in rlriestion cf. i'Spreclisnal" In one of

the next numbers of 2. A.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE EXPEDITION. ~ ~

I. JOAN P. PETERS. 1. Letter on tile Babylonian Expedi l io~~ : The American Journal of Archmology VII, pp. 472475. 2. A Brief Statement concerning tho Babylonian Expedition sent out under the auspices of the University

of Pennsylvania : I%.oceeili~li?~gs of the American Oriental Society, April 21-23, 1832, pp. CXLVI-CLIII.

3. Notes on lliirdter-Delitzsch's Geschicilte : Zeitscl~rvt fur Assyriologie VI, pp. 333-339. 4. A Few Ancient Sites, I and I1 : The Nation 1889, May 23, p. 423, and Nay 30, pp. 442, 443. 5. From Niffer to Tello, I and I1 : ibidem 1889, July 25, pp. 69, 70, and August 1, pp. 90-SJ. 6. Zenobin, Paimyra, and the Arabs : ibidem 1890, April 3, pp. 276, 271. 7. A Misrepresented Ruin : ibidem 1891, Hay 7, 1'11. 375-377.

11. H. V. IIILPRECHT. 1. Keilinschriftliche Funde in Niffer : ZeitschrLrift fiir Assyriologie 1V, pp. 16P168. 2. Aus einen~ Briefe desselben an C. Eczold : ibidem IV, pp. 282-284. 3. Die jungsten Ausgrnbung.cn in Babylonien : EZniacha Zeiturry 1889, June 30, No. 179. 4. Neue Forschungen in Bubyionicn : Luthardt's Enangelisoh Lutherische Kirc7~enzeitung 1888, June 14, pp.

568, 569. 5 . The &Iooti~ of the Na11r.el-I<olb : The Sunday School Tirnes 1889, Vol. XXXI, No. 11, p. 103. 6. Die Inschriften Nebukadnezar's irn Wadi Urissa : Lnthardt's Zeitsohrift fur Icirohliche Wissensc7iaft und

tcire7~liches Lebcn 1889 IX, pp. 491-498. Compare also Th6 Sunday School Times 1889, Val. XXXL

No. 35, yp. 547, 548 : Ti~eInscriptions af Nobucllt~dnozzar in the V a d y Brissa. 7. The Shnykh of Zeta : Tl~e Sunday S~hool Times 1890, Vol. XXXII, No. 10, pp. 147, 148. 8. Babylon : ibidem 1892, Voi. XXXIV, No. 20, pp. 306-308. 9. Die Votivinsclirift eines nicllt erkannten I<assiteniiiinigs : Zeilschrift fur ilssyriologie VII, pp. 305-318.

10. I<iinig Ini-Sin von Ur : ibidem VII, pp. 343-346. 11. Die Erginzung clor Nnluen zmeier Rassitenkiinigr : ibicllem, in print.

12. Zur Lapislazuli Frnge im Uabylonischsn : ibidem, iin print.

111. ROBERT FnhNcrs HARFEII.

1. Babylonian Letter.-'J'ile Joseph Sllemtab Collection of Babylonian Antiquities, recently purchased for

tile University of Pennsylvania : Hebraica IT, pp. 74-76. 2. Tile Kll. Colleclion of Babylonian Antiquities belonging to the University of Pennsylwnin : ibidem VI,

pp. 59, GO. 3. The Destruction of Antiquities in the East : ibidem VI, pp. 225, 236. 4. Three Contract Tablets of Asl~urilililani : ibidm VII, p. 79. 5. A Visit to Zinjirli : l'he Old and New Zbstarnsnt Student VIII, pp. 183, 194. 6. A Visit to Carchemish : ibidem IX, pp. 308, 309. 7. Down tile Euphrates Valley 1-111 : ibidem X, pp. 58-57 ; 118, 119 ; 367, 308. 8. Tile Expcclition of the Babylonian Exl~lorztion Fund, A. B. C. : ibidem XIV, DP. 160-165 ; 213-217 :

XV, PP 12-16 ; U. : Tho Biblical lVorld I, pp. 57-02. 0. Aus einelu Briefe desselben an C. Bozold : Zeitsch~ift j'iir Assyriologie ITT, pp. 163, 164. Compare also

Hebraica VIII, pp. 103, 104 : A-hi-e-shu-'= Ebishum. 10. Tile Site of Old Baghdid : The Academy 1880, February 23, p. 139. 11. A New Babylonian Contract : ibiden~ 1889, April 20, p. 374.

IV. T H E ~ P E I L U ~ G. PINCEE~ (based upon comnnlnications fro111 Dr. Peters and Dr. IIarper). 1. An Early Babylonian Inscription from Niffer : Eebroica VI, pp. 55-58.

2. Thc Discoveries of tile American Expedition to Babylonia : The Academy 1891 September 5 ,p . 109.

Compare also his note "Kadashman :" ibidem 1801, September 12, 11. 281.

c., circa; C. U. AI., Catnlogue of the Babylonian llusenm, University of Pennsylvania; col., colnmn(s) ; d., dinmeter: US"., Dynasty ; E., East ; f~.agm., fragmont(ary) ; II., l~eigllt ; Inscr . , Inscription ; I., lengtll; li., line(s) ; m., meter; N., North ; Nipynr I, 11, 111, etc., refers to the eorrcspontling numbers on Plate X V ; No., number; Nos., numbers; N. P., Notel~ook of Dr. Peters made on the ruins of Nippur during tile second year's excavations; Obv., Obverse; orig., nriginal(iy) ; p., page; Pllo., Pl~atograph ; PI., Plate; Rev., Reverse; S., South ; Sq., Squeeze; T., Temple ofBP1 ; tlt., thiek(noss) ; W., Vest; w., width; Z., Ziqqurratu ; Z. A., Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie.

I\Ieasurements are given in centimetres. TVhenevcr the object sarios in size, the largest measurement is given

3 3 Sargon I.

3 4 Nadm-Sin.

4 5 Al-uslrarsl~id.

PLATE. TEST. DATE. DEscnrrTroN.

1 1 Sargoil I. Door socket in diorite, somewi~at smaller t l ~ a ~ r tire following. Nippur. 111, beneath the rooms of T. on the S.E. side of %. Inscr. 18.5 x 10.12, 2 col., 24 Ii. Sq. On tlle rough edge, scratched in the rudest way,is the same inscr. as P1.:14, Nos. 23-25(cf.also PI. 12, No. 20).

2 2 Sargon I. Door socket in diorite, 75 X 41.5 X 17.5. Nippu~' 111, same place as

No. 1. Inscr. 17.8X 10.35, 2 col., 23 li. C. B. &I. 8551. Cf. PI. I, 1.

The variants li. li and 21 have been take11 from a third door socket i n diorite, bearing the same inscr. as No. 2, and found in another trench a short distance from it.

Briclc stamp of baked clay, brown, with handle, 9.45 X 13.55 X 2. Nippw 111, close to the S. E. wall of Z. Inscr. 2 col., 6 li.

C. H. M. 8751. Cf. PI. 11, 2. Brick stamp of baked clay, crealn colored, handle wanting, 11.75 X

12.08 X 2. Nippur TT, in tlie N.TTT. extremity. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. JI. 8755. CP. PI. 11, 3.

Three fragmelrts of adolomite vase. Orig. (1. of the vase c. 10. Fragm. 8891 : 11.10 x 7.i x 3.8. Fragm. 8892 a and b (glued together): 20.5 x 9.8 x 3.8. Nippza 111, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. orig. 25.57 X 7.2, 13 li. C. B. 31. 8891, 8802 a and b.

The text has beell restored by the aid of fragm. 8866, 8865, 8813, 8860, 8859, 8858, 8853, 8854 on the scale of fragm. 8892. Cf. PI. 111, 4-12.

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIl'TIONS

Al-usl~arsl~i(l.

Same Period.

Same Period.

o. SO00 B.C.

Ur-Gur.

Dungi.

Dungi.

Bur-Sin I.

BuliSin 11.

~)ESCIIIPTION.

Fragm. of a vase in reddish numulite limestone, 11. 16.5, d. 18 (of hole 4.4). N i p p e r 111, same place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. orig. 11.76 X

7.05, 6 li. C. B. 11. 8588. Tllc text has bee11 restored after No. 5.

Cf, Pl. I V , 13. Fragul. of a white marble vase, h. 21, rl. 16.4 a t the base, 11.2 a t the

centre. N z j i p i a 111, same place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. 4.8X 5.4,

3 li. C. B. M. 8870. Cf. PI. V, 14. Fragm. of a white marble vase, orig. h. 6, d. 14.5. N i l ) p t ~ ~ . 111, same

place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. (same as Pi. 5, No. 7) 3.2 X 3.8, 3 li.

C. B. 11. 8830. Fragm. of e wliite marble vase, orig. 11. 13.5, d. 15 (of bole 6.3). Xip-

PUT 111, same place as 1'1. 1, Xo. 1. Mark on the bottom, 2.4 X 2.6. Same inscr. as PI. 6, KO. 7. N. P.

Fragm. of a diorite vase, 7.36 X 2.8 X 0.8, orig. d. 22.2. A7ij~jiur 111,

salue place as PI. 4, No. 5. Inscr. 3, orig. 11 li. C. H. 11. 8842. \\'l~ite marble tablet,Obv.flat, Itev, rounded, 11.3 X 7.2 X 2.65. i l i l ippiir,

apparently from the X. 'W. extremity of V in the neighborliood of PI. 3, No. 4 (cf. Hilprecl~t in Z. A. I V , pp. 282-284). Inscr. 8 (Obv.) + 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 I labyloi l . Inscr. 2 cul., 8 li. C. B. 31. 1128.

Fragm. of a slab in compact limestone, 12.8 X 7.35 X 5 . 6 . 1 T i p p u ~ 111, inside of the great S.E. telilpie ~vall. Inscr. 3 col., 15 li.

C. B. 31. 8811. Basalt tablet, Obv. Pat, Rev. rounded, lower left corner wanting,

12.25 X 5.68 X 2.2. Xorthern Babylonia, probably Uvsag-IiEsl~. 111scr. 8 (Obv.) + 1 (Rev.) = 9 li. C. 11. 31. 841.

Agate tdblet, bored lengtllwise, both sides convex, lower part manting, 4.4 X 4.3 X 0.8. i i p ] n i ~ 111, in a chamber on the edge of the canal outside of tlie great S.E. wall of T. Obv. Inscr. 8 li. C. B. &I. 8698. For Rev. see Pi . 21, Xo. 43.

Soapstone tablet, Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, 8.6 x 5 x 1.88. Babylonia, probably Jlurja!iy(cr. Iiiscr. G (Obv.) + 2 (Ilev.) = 8 li. C. B. M. 842.

Frl~gm. of ;L slab in iliorite, 5.1 X 10.5 X 5.6. Nippz ' r 111, S. of Z. Inscr. 3 col., 3 f 2 + 217 li. C. B. hl. 3243.

Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, h ro \~n , 32 (orig.) x 23 (fragm.) x 8.4 (orig.). A7ippti?' 111, foulld ont of plnce in a later s t r u c t ~ ~ r e on the S.E. side of Z. (cf. PI. 20, No. 82; PI. 13, No. 22; P1. 20, No. 38). Imscr. (writtell) 23.3 X 10.65, 13 li. C. H. 11. 0021. Cf. IV, It. 352, No. 5.

Fragm. of ahrick of baked clay, brown, 30.6 (fragm.) x 20 (fragm.) x 6.5 (Eragm.). N i p p ~ 6 1 . 111, follll(1 out of place, same place as PI. 10,Ko. 18. Inscr. (stamped) 22.5 x 10.5, 10 li. C. B. &I. 8642.

Door socket in diorite, an irregular cube, c. 10 eacll side. i l ' i p p z i ~ 111, in a small sllrille ouLside of tlle great S.E. ail of T. Inscr. 15.4 x 13.4 ,2col . , l l+G=l i l i . C.B.M.8838.

:HISFLY FROM NIPPUR. 49

Tes,~.. !)ATE.

21 Bur-Sin I1

22 Bur-Sin 11.

26 c. 2 5 0 B.C.

27 Hammurabi.

28 Cassite Dgn,

20 Cassite Dyn.

30 Cassite Dyu.

31 Cassite Ilyn.

32 Cassite Ilyn.

33 Burna-Buriash.

33 Burna-Buriasli. 3-1 Burna-Buriash.

3.5 Kurigalzu,

36 Kurigalzu.

Dn:scsrr~r~ox.

Door socket in cliorite, 53 X 28 X 23. N$,puv 111, same place as P1. 11,

No. 18. Inscr. aroutld the hole, 23.5 x 5.35,17 li. Sq. On the bottom a t the edge is tlie same inscr. as PI. 14,Nos. 23-25 (cf. also PI. 1, KO. 1).

Briclr of baked clay, light brown, very soft, corered wit11 bitnmen, 30

x 30 x 6.5. Nipliu~ 111, same plilce as Pi. 11, No. 10. Iuscr. (written) 5.97 x 5.3, 2 li. Scl. The inscription is generally re. liel~ted three or four times on the same brick (edges and sides).

Large mlhewn bloclis of white marble and reddish granite, varying in cl. from 25-60. Iv7ipjiur 111, approximately same place as 1'1. 1, No.1. Insc r .6X5. : I ;7XG.2 ;G.5Xi .7 ;eac113l i . Sq.

Cre;im-colored sonpstone tablet, Rev. broke11 off, 4.85 X 4 X 0.8. Pre. surnably neigllborhood of Bahy lo l~ . Inscr. 8 li. C. B. bf. 103.

Fragm. of an ornamented soapstoile stamp in Lhc sbape of a vase. h. 13.3, d. 12.2 a t tlie bottom, 8.7 at tho centre. Presumably neighborhood of Babylon. Inscr. (on the bottom) 8 li. C. B. M. 1126. Cf. PI. I S , 20.

1,:~pis lazuli disc, (1. 1.i. The thickness of this class of inscribed objects foulid at the same place, if not expressly stated in the following lines, varies from 0.2 to 0.8 cm. h'ipl,t~r 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. C. B. &I. 8685.

Agate cameo, d. 1.56. Nipjiul' 111, same p1;~Ce as PI. 8, Xo. 15,

C. B. 31. 8687.

Lapis lazuli disc, d. 1.6. N~PIIZLT 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15.

C. H . M. 8721.

Agate cameo, bored lengtll~vise, 1.7 X 1.9. Nil~llz~r 111, same place as PI. S, No. 15. C. B. M. 8723.

Lapis lazuli tablet, bored lengtll~vise, I.(% X 1.8. NiZ,lixr I , apparently out of place, i n a grdly on the snrfnce. C. B. A t . 8720.

TVliite marble mortar; :LI~ uninscribed l~ortion is broken from its side, h. 14.4, d. 12.8. Presumably neighborhood of Babylon. Inscr. 3 X 1 1 . 5 27 1 C. B. M. 12. Cf. PI. IX, 21.

The same, continued. Ivory knob of a sceptre (or corrventioi~alized form of a phallus), top

rounded, base ilat, round hole in the centre, h. 3.5, d. 5.9 at the top, 6.2 a t tlie bottom. ATii~pzw 111, same glace as PI. 6 , No. 15.

Inscr. 5.8 X 2.42, 5 li. C. B. 31. 8730. Cf. PI. X, 23.

Tablet in feldspar (mottled dark lrrown and gray), upper (inscribed) surface convex, lower Rat, 3 X 12.2 X 0.9. Adipiitw 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. hf. HGOO.

Irregular block of lapis lazuli, upper part inscribell, 5.1 x 9.25 x 5.

1Vippsr 111, same place as P1. 8, No. 16. Inscr. 3.38 X 4.48, 6 li. C . B. 31. 8598. Cf. Pl. XI, 25.

Door socket in white marble Tvith rod veins here and there, 46.5 x 43.8

X22. Nipptw 111, 011 the N.E. side of T. near the onter mall. In. scr. on both sides of the holc, 11 li. intended, but olily 7 ii. 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 Kurigalzu.

20 39 Kurigalzu.

21 42 l'iurigalzu.

21 43 liurigalzu. 21 44 liurigalzu.

22 47 Xurigalzn.

22 48 I'iurigalzu.

22 49 Kurigalzu.

22 50 liurigalzu,

22 51 Iiurigalzu.

22 52 Kurigalzu.

22 53 Nazi-Maruttasl~,

DESCRIPTION.

Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, brown, 33 (orig.) x 17 (fragm.)X 7 o g IY~,IJ~LT 111, found out of place in a later structure of tlie inner wall of Z. (cf. PI. 29, No. 82; PI. 10, No. 18). Inscr. 13.5X 6, 9 li, stamped on the edge; the space being too small, a portion of tlie last cheracter of each line is wanting. C . B. 31. 8636.

Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lnzuli, 9 x 6.3 x 2.7. ATiI,l,tw 111, sarric place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 7 li. C. 13. hI. 9462. Cf. P1. XI, 26.

Fragm. of ail axe in imitatiou of lapis lazuli, 6 x 6.35 x 1.5. N i l ~ l ~ u ? 111, same place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 8G(il.

Fragm. of a li~pis lazuli tablet, 1.7 x 1.7. 3il)ijul- 111, same place a8 P1. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. 31. 8662. Originally it formed y;vt of No. 46.

Fragm. of a lapis kvauli tablet, 1.8 X 1.2. Nipl~tc? 111, same plwe as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. I f . 8663.

Agate tablet. Ilev. of PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 9 li. I.'ragm. of a turquoise tablet. Obv. flat, Rev. rounded; 11ole bore11

iiearly perpetldicular to tlie lilies of tlie Obv.; 3.4 x 3.4 x 0.8. Aril?pur 111, same place as P1. 8, No. 15. Iuscr. 4 li. C. B. &I. 8664.

L:il~is lazuli tablet, with two holes, 2 X 2.6. Nippnr. 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Insor. 2 li. C. B. 31. 8065.

Two fragm. of a lapis laztlli tablet, 3.65 X 7.25. ATil~j,~'?' 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. In cutting tile tablet from the original block of lal~is lazuli the last cliaracters of each line were lost. C B I . 8 6 6 The copy has been made from nn elrctro- type, on which the space between the two fragments mas giveti too small (cf. No. 41).

Xitie fragm. of a lapis lazuli tablet, 5.1 x 6 x 0.7. Ni]il,tir 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Itscr. 6 1 C. U. M. 8667.

Lapis lazuli tablet, hole bored near the top parallel wit11 tile lines. 2.8 X 3.45. N i p p t ~ ? 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 5 li. C. B. &I. 8668.

Lapis lazuli disc, hole tored Itear tlie centre parallel with tlie l i i~es d. 2.5. Ni~,,jiur 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. N. P.

Fragm. of an agate ring, a. 1, \v. 0.9. Niljpur 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Iiiscr. 5 li. C. B. hl. 86G9. Tlie ring originally formed tlie beginning of a votive cylinder (c. 2.6 em. long), which was afterwards cut in 3 pieces, each tlms forming a ring. For the centre part see 1'1. 26, Xo. 74. The last part has not been found.

Agate cameo, 3.2 X 2.4. hii,pzv 111, same pli~ce as fl. 8, Xo. 15. Inscr. 4 li. N. P.

Fragm. of ail aagte cameo, 1.7 X 1.2. IYipp~cr 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 2 li. C. B. DI. 8670.

Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.97. Nippi' 111, same place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. Inscr. G li. N. P.

[I<adasl~marl]-EN- LIL.

[IZadiwhmaii ? I - Buriash.

[Xatl;isl>rnxn ?- Bulriasll.

I)ESCRIPTIOK.

1,ajlis lazuli disc, d. 2.05. A7ij1pui. 111, same place as Pl. 8, Xo. 15. Inscr. 5 li. N.P.

Fragm. of an axe in imitatiou of lapis lazuli, 4.7 X 4.G x 1.7. A ' i i i p~~~

111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 8671. Magnesite knob of a sceptre (or conventionillized form of a pl~allns),

top rounded, base Rat, rounil l~ole in the centre, h. 6.2, d. 6.9.

K i p p t ~ ~ . 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 16. Ittscr. around the top, badly effaced. C. B. hI. 8728. Cf. PI. X, 24.

11ngnesite knob of a sceptro (or conve~itiollalized form of a plti~llus), top sliglltly rounded, base Rat, liole in the centro (round ;hove, square bolow), 11. 5.2, d. G.1. n'i)il,~ri. 111, same place ;IS 1'1. 8 ,So . 1 Inscr. around the top, badly effaced. C. B. &I. 8i27. Cf. PI. X, 22.

Fr;igrn. of a lapis lazrlli disc, (I. 4.1. S i j i p u ~ 111, same place as PI. 8,

No. 15. Inscr. 5 li. (orig. 8). N. P. Fragm. of a lapis krzuli disc, d. 3.7. Nip,i~rr 111, same 11l;lce as PI. 8,

No. 15. Inscr. G li. (orig. 7). N. P. Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, d. 2.55. S i p p a r 111, same place as PI. 8,

S o . 15. IIISC~. 4 li. (orig. 5). C. B. 31. 8722. Lapis lnzuli disc, d. 3.55, tlt. 0.35. Place uul~noivti, probably Sipptir.

c . 8 I Original in the Museum of 1I;lrvard University, Cambridge, Mass. Cf. 1,yon in Pvocrecliags of tile An~eriran Oriei~tnl Sociel!], May, 1889, pp. cxxsiv-cxxxiii, ati(l Hil~~recl i t it1 Z. A. V I I , 1 1 ~ . 505-518.

1.apislazuli disc, (1. 2.7. A-i~,~iul. 111, same pli~ce iis PI. 8, No. 1.5.

Inscr. 5 li. C. B. hl. UGi3.

Irregular block of lapis lazuli, 17.5 X I1 X 9. S i p l i 1 1 ~ I11 in a room in the monnds S. of T. Inscr. 16.4 X 0.5, 20 li. Sq.

I.apis lazuli disc, d. 2.5. lV!pj~ur 111, same place as P1. 8, No. 16.

I s c r 6 I . N. P . Frt~gm. of an agate cameo, [I. 3.6. Ni j ipu~ 111, same place its PI. 8,

No. 13. Inscr. 5 li. C. B. hl. 8674. Fragm. of an agate ring,orig.d. 2.7 (of the Ilole, 0.9), m. 0.90. A7ip~iu~

111, same place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. C. H. M. 8676. 17 * tngm. .. of an agate ring, Rev. of No. 66.

1rregol;tr block of lapis lazoli, convex on the inscribed surface, 13 X 7.32 X 3. 1Vijipur 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 11.5 X 5.0, 3 col., 63 li. (orig. G9 ?). Sq.

hhgnesite knob of a sceptre (or convet~tionalized form of a hallus us), top rounileil, base flat, round hole in the centre, 11. e. 5, d . 7. hTippt~v 111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. around the top. N. P.

Magnesite knob of a sceptre (or cor~veritionalized form of a phallus), top rounded, base flat, round llole in the centre, 11. 4.6, d. 6.8. ATijipt~v 111, same place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. Inscr. aroulid the top. (>, 3. &I. 8729.

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS

[Uibeia.lsl~u.

Cassite Dyn.

Cassite Dyn.

. . . . . . ia-ash.

Csssite Dyn.

Nazi-Slaruttilsh.

IBiliei&-lsho.

c. 1100 B.C.

REI-&din-aplu. Naboyolassar.

D E ~ ~ R ~ P T I ~ N .

1.apis lazuli tablet, 2.35 X 2.1G. X p p u v 111, sallle plklce as PI. 8, No. 16. 1 1 s c 5 1 C. B. 31. 8682.

I?agm. of an axe in imitation of lapis Ittzuli, 11 x 625 x 1.25. nni]iptlr

111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. C. I:. M. 8880. Agate cameo, d. c. 1.8. I\iiiji?n. 111, same place as PI. 8, S o . 15.

C. 13. 11. 8883. Fragm. of an agate ring, d. 1, w. 1.1. Sil i l~tr~ 111, same place as PI.

8, No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. C. B. &I. S(jS4. Tlie ring originally formed

tlie centre part of a votive cyliniler. Cf. PI. 22, S o . 60. Fragm. of a11 axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, (i x 2.5 x 1.5. A'ipi~ti~

111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. ci li. C. B. 11. 8081. Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis Inzuli, 5.26 x 2.1. ATipl~ti~ 111,

same place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. X. P. Fragli~ent of a vase in soapstone rock, 8.5 X 8.8 (orig. (I. a t tliel~ottolll

13.2). Aripjiuj,pur V , o. 3 m. belom tlie surface. Inscr. 7 li. C. 11. 31. 8690.

Fragm. of an 8xe in imikttion of lapis lazuli, 6.2 x 6.2 x 1.7. S i p 2 , z ~ t .

111, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 9 li. C. B. hr. 8685. Fragm. of an axe in imitl~tionof lapis laznli, 2.36 x 2.85 x 1.5. Xipjiu~

111, same piace as Pi. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. 31. 8686. Fragm. of a reddish granite (boundary) stone of pilallic sliape, 1. lZ.6.

l\'il,11l~1. 111, C. 1.5 111. below the surface on the slope of the T. llill N.W. of Z. Inscr. 2 eol., 6 li. Pilo, aud S. P. Cf. PI. S I I , 32,33.

. Fragm. of a baked brick, ye l lo~~ish , very soft, pnrtly covered mitli

bitumen, 22.5 (fragln.) x 18.4 (fragm.) X 6.9 ("rig.). Xi~ i l i~~r 111, found out of place in ;L later structure of tlie inner wall of Z. (cf. PI. 2'1, No. 82; PI. 10, No. 18; 1'1. 13, No. 22; PI. 20, Ko. 38).

IllsCr. written, 15.2 X 8.6, 10 li. C. B. 31. 8643. Brick of balzed clay, brown, pnrtly covered with bitumen, 20.i; X

30.2X 6.7. 1Qpuv 111, i~nler ~ ~ a l i of %. Every brick of this structure bears tlle name of hlili-Shiktlu \~.itll exactly tlie s;lme inscription (stampell), except a few rvhicll belong to Ur-Ninib (PI. 10, Xo. IS), Bur-Sin (PI. 11, No. 19), ICurigalau (PI. 20, No. 381, Rammffi~shuunc~~nv (PI. 28, No. 81). The liittel. four evidei~tly formed a part of tile ancient structure, and vere utilized by Mili-Shikl~u ill liis restoratio~i of the pkatform of Z. Inscr. stamped, 1 4 . 8 ~ 7, 11 li. C. B. &I. 8632. Cf. Pincl~es "An Early Babylonian lnscriptio~i frorn Niffer " in Hebrt~ie i~ V I , pp. 55-58.

Black limestone tablet, 16.76 x 12.1 x 5.1. Presumably neigiiborliood of Bub?~Zon. Obv., slightly rounded, 22 li. C. B. 11. 13.

Tile same, Rev., rounded, 24 li. Cylinder of baked clay, cartridge slreped, hollow, small hole a t the

top, dark bro17.n witlr grayis11 spots; when found, lialf covered with bitumen; 11. 15.2, d. of Llle base 8.85, d. of tile bole 2.2. Bahylon. Inscr. 3 col., 46 + 65 + 59 1-169 ii. C. U . 31. 9000. Cf. 1'1. X I I I , No. 34. The variants liave been taken from a mutilated cylinder (B) in the British hlnseunl, published by Strassmaier in Z. A. I V , pp. 129-136. Apparent mistakes in Strassmaier's edition

CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 53

VIII V I I I

TEXT. DATE. DESCRIPTION.

are not quoted as variants (cf. also Strnssniilier in Z. A. l V , pp. 106-113, and Winclder in Scl~r;ider's Iieilil~scii~~lliche Bibliolhelc 111, Piirt 2, pp. 2-71,

84 h'abopolassar. The same, contin~ie~l. 85 Kebucliadrezzar 11. Fragm. of a balied cl;iy cylinder, bxrrel sl~ajied, solid, light brown; 11.

23.0, d. 8.8 at tlie top and base, 11.6at tlie centre. Ijubylon. Inscr. 4 col., 23 (orig. c. 48) + 3'1 (orig. c. 66) + 30 (orig C. 56) +?8 (orig. c. 48)=113 (orig. c. 208) li. C. B. 11. li85. Cf. P1. XIV, S o . 33.

Aceorditig to illformation of tlie Arabs the cylinder mas found wllole and intentionally broken lengthwise. Tlie other lialf is supposed to be in existence.

85 Kebuchadrezznr 11. The same, colrlr~ms 111, IV.

1 Sargon I. Door soeliet in diorite. A'ipp~w. Cf. 1'1, 1. 2 Sargon I. Brick slam1ill of baked clay, Rev. i t Cf. 1'1. 3 , S o . 3. 3 Nxrfm-Sin. IlricB stamp of kilced clay, Obv. Xippzi~. Cf. PI. 3, KO. 4.

4-12 ;\I-nshashid. Fragments of vases from wbich the text on 1'1. 4 has been obt%iliod. S i j j i ~ t ~ r . Nos. 4, 6 : dolomite; Kos. 6, 8, 0, 10: white nlarble; No. i : red banded marble of agate structure; Nos. 11, 12: white marble of staiaclitic structure. For the restoration of li. 6 fragm. 88GO (wl~ite marble) has been consulteil.

13 kl-usl~arsl>id. Fragrn. of a vase in redclisl~ nutnulite lii~~estone. I . Cf. PI. 5 , KO. 6 .

14 11-ushnrshid. Fragm. of a x7hite marble vnse rrith gray and reddish veins here niid there. i t . Cf. PI. 5, NO. 7.

16 Not lator tllall 2400 U.C. Fragm. of a white marble slab, 2G.li5 X 16.8 X 7.0. Abu i lahha. Orig. iii:il in Consta~itinople. l'llotograph taken from a cast. Inscr. on botll sides and left edge, 301 li. Obv., 0 col., ('10 + 26 + 24 + ?2 + 22+26+19+23+4r:) 185li.

16 Not later than 2400 11.C. The sanie, Rev., 9 cd . , (19+ 19+23 + 2: + 28 f 24 + 25 + 22 +I3 --) 19s li.

17 Not later Uisn 2100 U.C. The same, left edge, 1 col., 18 li. 18, 19 c. 2100 D.C. Tablets of baked clay, recldish bro~vn n.itli black spots. Those tab-

lets have a peculiar sl~;ipe; tiley are roniided a t both ends alld on the left side, but angular and flat on the riglit side, as if cut off from a larger tablet. Y o k h c ~ . NO. 18 : 10.3 x 4.3: th. 1.6 on tile left, 2.2 on the right side. C. B. M. 0042. No. 10 : 10.li2 X 4.5, th. 1.7 on tlie left, 2.56 on the right side. C. B. M. 9011.

20 Axmmurabi. Fragm. of am orilamel~terl siamp in the shape of a vast., made of soap- stone (composed of ;i green micaeeous and very soft tnineral, prob- ably talc). Presumably ueigllborhood of Bc~bylon . Cf, PI. 16, No. 27.

XI1

XI11

XIV

XV

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.

Kurigalzu.

I<urigalzu.

c. 1350 B.C.

c. 1100 B.C.

Xabopolassar.

Nebuchxdrezzar 11.

1889 A.D.

DESC~IPTIOII.

Fragm. of a white m:~rblo mortar. Presuml~bly neigl~borhood of Babglo?~. Cf. Plates 16, 17.

Knob of a, sceptre (or conventionalized form of a phallus) in ivory. Side view. ATij,pu~. Cf. PI. 15, KO. 34.

Icnobs of sceptres (cf. PI. S, 23) in rnagnesite. Top vie\lrs. ATij~ptl~.

Cf. PI. 23, Nos. 5i, 56. Inscribed block of lapis lazuli, tablet in process of ciitting. Ari]iii~~r.

Cf. PI. 18, No. 36. Fragm. of a votive battle axe in imitation of lapis lazuli (blue glass).

Nipi~ur. Cf. PI. 20, No. 30. Fragm. of a votive battle axe ill imiti~tion of lapis lazuli, 5.32 X

5.65 x 5.1. Xi~jj)l)t~r 111, Same place as PI. 8, No. 15. C. B. h1.

8800. Fragm. of a, votive battle axe in lapis I~zul i , 6.4 x 5.7 X 1.5. Tlie

inscription has been erased in order to use the material. A7ip1lt~v 111, same place as 1'1. 8, No. 15. C. B. M. 8597.

Tliree small fragments of a n inscribed basrelief in a basaltic stone, 11.

c.5. Ahijj],tr 111: on the S.E. side of the Bur-Sin shrine (cf. P1. 11, No. 10).

Fragm. of a reddish granite (boundary) stone of phallic sliilpe. * I -

p ~ i v . T w o views of tlle same stone. Cf. PI. 27, No. 80.

Cylinder of baked clay, cartridge-shaped, hollow, smitll hole a t tile top. Babylon. Cf. Plates 32, 33.

Cylinder of baked clay, barrel-shaped, solicl. Bcibglon. Cf. Plates 31, 35.

Plan of tlie first year's excavations a t Nippur (February 5 to April 16).

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. 9. XVIII, 1. PI. 1

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVITI, 1.

L. 15: @ is omitted by the scribe.

L. 17 and 21: m e dzcplicate reads

Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII , 1.

3

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S. XVIII, 1.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S. XVIII, 1.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S. X V I I I , 1

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. X V I I I , 1

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII , I

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

Obverse.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S. XVIII , 1. 18

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, 1.

19 PI. 11

Trans. Am. Fhil. Soo., N. S. X V I I I , 1

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

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S . XVIII, I

Trans. Am. Phi l . Soe., N. S. X V I l 1 , I

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII, I

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. xVIII, 1

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S. XVIII , 1.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1

Hole, diameter 11.7 cm

Tmnr. Am Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII. I

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S . XVIII, 1

W No. 46.

Reverse of No. 15.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 1.

Mistake of scribe

fw Fl

50 57

5

cj No. 74 52

53 54

55

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

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. X V I I I , I .

L. 7. Erasure 3f DINGIR, the second character of KA-DINGIR-RA,

written by the scribe erroneously hdore KA.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII , 1.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. X V I I I , I

Trans. Am. Phil. soc., N. s XVIII, 1

Trans. Am. Phil. S o c . , N. S. X V I I I , 1

Trans. Am. Phil. soc., N. S. XVIII, I

'r1.8-sns. A171 Phil. Soc., N. S XVl l i . 1

Trans. A m . Phil. Soo., N. S. X V I I I , 1

83 Reverse,

On the left margin of Reverse are tra

On the lower margin of Reverse is ,

PI. 32 Trans. Am. Phil. Soc . , N. S . X V I I I , 1

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc.,N. S. X V I I I , I. pl. 8s

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S. XVIII, 1. PZ. 34

85

Col.

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S . XVIII, 1. PZ. 35

85 Continued

001. IIL Col. IF

Trans. A m . Phi l . Soe., N. S. X V I I I , I

DOOR-SOGKfT O F SARGON I .

N ~ p p u r ,

Trans. Am. ~ l ~ i l . SOC, N. S. X V I I I , 1

CLAY STAMPS F O R BRICKS,

N i p p u r ,

2. Salgan I, Xrrerse. 3. Nar.p~?u Sin, Obverse

T r a m s , Am. Phll. Soc., N S X V I I I , I

VASE FRAGMENTS O F ALUSHARSMID ( U R U - M U - U S H j ,

Nipou:.

Trans. An?. Phil. soe., N. S. X V I I I , I

13

VASE FRAGMENT OF ALUStibRSFiID (URU-MU-USn),

Nlppur ,

Trans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. X V I I I , 1.

V A S E F R A G M E N T O F A L U S H A R S H I D (URU-MU-USFI) ,

Nippur,

Trans A m . Phll. Soo., N. S. X V I I I , 1

I S

F R A G M E N T O F A M A R B L E S L A B : O B V E R S E .

~ l s d nabncl ,

Trans. Arn .Ph i l .Soc . ,N .S . X V I I I . 1

F R A G M E N T O F A MARBLE S L A B : R E V E R S E ,

bbu Habba,

Traxrr. Am. Phil. Soc., N. S . X V I I I , 1

17. F R A G M E N T O F A MARBLE S L A B : EDGE-Abu t fabba.

18, 19, Toblets of Baked Glay-Yokha,

Trans. A m . Phil.Soc., N. S. X V I I I , 1

21

00. S T A M P O P t iAMMURAR1, 21 MORTAR OF B U R N R R U R I A S H ,

Northern Babylonia.

Trans. Am. Phi l . Sac., N.s. X V I I I , I

24

K N O B S O F SGEPTRCS-Nippur ,

22, 24. Mognes i te ( top view), Nazi-Mdruttosh 23. Ivory (side view), Burnuburiash,

rmns. A m . Phil. Soc.. N. S . X V l l l

2s

V O T I V E OBJECTS IN L A P I S L A Z U L I AND I M I T A T I O N ,

N ~ p p u r

Trams. A m . Phil. Sac., N. S. X V I I I , 1

a2 33

F R A G M E N T S O F I N S C R I B E D BAS-RELIEFS.

Nippur ,

rrans. A m . ~ i i i l . soc., N. s X V I I I , I

84

POINTED CLAY CYLINDER O F NABOPOLASSAR

Babylon,

Trans. A m . Ph i l . Soe.,N. S. X V I I I , 1.

BARRE :L-SHAPED GLRY C Y L I N D E R OF N E R U G H A D R E Z Z P

Babylon,

Trans. A m . P h i l . Soc., N. S. X V I I I , I

86

PLAN O F THE F I R S T YEAR'S EXCAVATIOIYS A T NIPPUR, The Ronmn l~ulnbcrs indicate the places where e*cnmtio?ls wrre made: tke Aribic. the heiglit of t h e inouxlds,

in lurtres, above the present level ot the canal bed. Aboiit five metres most be added to u!,t;iin the nctil:hl hrixht above the plain. I11 Ekur-BinL el-.imir iTemplr). Y i i Niniit->lardak (Wall).

Electronic publication prepared by

Kelvin Smith LibraryCase Western Reserve University

Cleveland, Ohio

for

ETANA Core Texts http://www.etana.org/coretexts.shtml