Babylonia (Babylonian Bâbili,"gate of God"; Old Persian Babirush),Was the ancient country of Mesopotamia, known originally as Sumer and later as Sumer and Akkad, lying between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, south of modern Baghdâd, Iraq.

History of the Babylonians and the region of Babylonia (Babylon)

Chronology And History



An essential condition for adequate knowledge of an ancient people

is the possession of a continuous historical tradition in the form of oral

or written records. This, however, in spite of the mass of contemporaneous

documents of almost every sort, which the spade of the excavator has

unearthed and the skill of the scholar deciphered, is not available for

scientific study of Babylonian or Assyrian antiquity. From the far-off

morning of the beginnings of the two peoples to their fall, no historians

appeared to gather up the memorials of their past, to narrate and preserve

the annals of these empires, to hand down their achievements to later days.

Consequently, where contemporaneous records fail, huge gaps occur in the

course of historical development, to be bridged over only partially by the

combination of a few facts with more or less ingenious inferences or

conjectures. Sometimes what has been preserved from a particular age

reveals clearly enough the artistic or religious elements of its life, but

offers only vague hints of its political activity and progress. The true

perspective of the several periods is sometimes lost, as when really

critical epochs in the history of these peoples are dwarfed and distorted by

a lack of sources of knowledge, while others, less significant, but

plentifully stocked with a variety of available material, bulk large and

assume an altogether unwarranted prominence.



36. What the Babylonians and Assyrians failed to do in supplying a

continuous historical record was not accomplished for them by the later

historians of antiquity. Herodotus, in the first Book of his "Histories,"

devotes twenty-three chapters to Babylonian affairs (Bk. I. 178-200), and

refers to an Assyrian history in which he will write more at length of these

events (I. 184). But the latter, if written, has been utterly lost, and the

chapters just mentioned, while containing information of value, especially

that which he himself collected on the ground, or drew from an earlier

traveller, presumably Hecataeus of Miletus, give distorted and fantastic

legends where sober history might be expected. Ctesias of Cnidos, physician

at the court of Artaxerxes Mnemon (415-398 B.C.), who seems to have had

access to some useful Assyrian material from Persian sources, introduced his

Persian History with an account of Babylonio-Assyrian affairs, in which the

same semi-mythical tales were interspersed with dry lists of kings in so

hopeless a jumble of truth and falsehood as to reconcile us to the

disappointment of having only a few fragments of it.



37. It is, however, a cause of keen regret that the three books of

Babylonian or Chaldean History, by Berosus, have come down from the past

only in scanty excerpts of later historians. Berosus was a Babylonian

priest of the god Bel, and wrote his work for the Macedonian ruler of

Babylonia, Antiochus Soter, about 280 B.C. As the cuneiform writing was

still employed, he must have been able to use the original documents, and

could have supplied just the needed data for our knowledge. Still, the

passages preserved indicate that he had no proper conception of his task,

since he filled a large part of his book with mythical stories of creation

and incredible tales of primitive history, with its prediluvian dynasties of

hundreds of thousands of years. A postdiluvian dynasty of thirty-four

thousand ninety-one years prepares the way for five dynasties, reaching to

Nabonassar, king of Babylon (747 B.C.), from whose time the course of events

seems to have been told in greater detail down to the writer's own days.

Imperfect and crude as this work must have been, it was by far the most

trustworthy and important compendious account of Babylonio-Assyrian history

furnished by an ancient author, and for that reason would, even to-day, be

highly valued. A still more useful contribution to the chronological

framework of history was made by Ptolemy, a geographer and astronomer of the

time of the Roman Emperor, Antoninus Pius. Ptolemy's "Canon of Kings,"

compiled for astronomical purposes, starts with the same Nabonassar at whose

time Berosus begins to expand his history, and continues with the names and

regnal years of the Babylonian kings to the fall of Babylon. Since Ptolemy

proceeds with the list through the Persian, Macedonian, and Roman regnal

lines in continuous succession, and connects the era of Nabonassar with

those of Philip Arridaeus and Augustus, a synchronism with dates of the

Christian era is established, by which the reign of Nabonassar can be fixed

at 747-733 B.C. and the reigns of his successors similarly stated in terms

of our chronology. By this means, not only is a chronological basis of

special value laid for this later age of Babylonian history, but a starting-

point is given for working backward into the earlier periods, provided that

adequate data can be secured from other sources.



38. Happily for historical science, the original documents of Babylonia

and Assyria are unexpectedly rich in material available for this purpose.

As already stated (sect. 29), the Assyrians were remarkably gifted with the

historic sense, and not only do their royal annals and other similar

documents contain many and exact chronological statements, but there was in

vogue in the royal court a practical system which went far toward

compensating for the lack of an era according to which the dates of events

might be definitely fixed. From the royal officers one was appointed each

year to give his name to the year. He or his official status during that

period was called limu, and events or documents were dated by his name. The

king usually acted as limu for the first full year of his reign. He was

followed in succession by the Turtan, or commander-in-chief, the Grand

Vizier, the Chief Musician, the Chief Eunuch, and the governors of the

several provinces or cities. Lists of these limi were preserved in the

royal archives, forming a fixed standard of the greatest practical value for

the checking off of events or the dating of documents. While this system

was in use in Assyria as early as the fourteenth century, the lists which

have been discovered are of much later date and of varying length, the

longest extending from 893 B.C. to about 650 B.C. Sometimes to the mere

name of the limu was added a brief remark as to some event of his year.

Such a reference to an eclipse of the sun occurring in the limu of Pur-



Sagali in the reign of Ashurdan III., has been calculated to have taken

place on the fifteenth of June, 763 B.C., a fact which at once fixes the

dates for the whole list and enables its data to be compared with those

derived from the synchronisms of the canon of Ptolemy and other sources.

The result confirms the accuracy of the Assyrian document, and affords a

trustworthy chronological basis for fully three centuries of Assyrian

history. For the earlier period before 900 B.C. the ground is more

uncertain, but the genealogical and chronological statements of the royal

inscriptions, coupled with references to contemporaneous Babylonian kings

whose dates are calculable from native sources, supply a foundation which,

if lacking in some parts, is yet capable of supporting the structure of

historical development.



39. The Babylonians, while they possessed nothing like the well wrought

out limu system of Assyria, and dated events by the regnal years of their

kings, had in their kings' lists, compiled by the priests and preserved in

the temples, documents of much value for historical purposes. The "Great

List," which has been preserved, arranges the names in dynasties, and gives

the regnal years of each king. At the end of each dynasty, the number of

the kings and the sum of their regnal years are added. Though badly broken

in parts, this list extends over a millennium, and contains legible names of

at least seventy kings arranged in about nine dynasties. As the last

division contains names of rulers appearing in the Assyrian and Ptolemaic

canon, the starting-point is given for a chronological organization of the

Babylonian kings, which unfortunately can be only approximately achieved,

owing to the gaps in the list. The two other lists now available cover the

first two dynasties only of the great list. Not only do they differ in some

respects from one another, but they do not help in furnishing the missing

names in the great list. These can be tentatively supplied from

inscriptions of kings not mentioned on the lists, and presumably belonging

to periods in which the gaps occur. Using all the means at their disposal,

scholars have generally agreed in placing the beginning of the first dynasty

of Babylon somewhat later than 2500 B.C.



40. For the chronology of Babylonian history before that time, the

sources are exceedingly meagre, and all results, depending as they do upon

calculation and inference from uncertain data, must be regarded as

precarious. Numerous royal inscriptions exist, but connections between the

kings mentioned are not easy to establish, and paleographic evidence, which

must be invoked to determine the relative age of the documents, yields often

ambiguous responses. A fixed point, indeed, in this chaos seems to be

offered in a statement made by Nabuna'id, a king of the New Babylonian

Empire. In searching for the foundations of the sun temple at Sippar, he

came, to use his own words, upon "the foundation-stone of Naram Sin, which

no king before me had found for 3200 years." As the date of the discovery is

fixed at about 550 B.C., Naram Sin, king of Agade, whose name and

inscriptions are known, may be placed at about 3750 B.C., and his father,

Sargon, at about 3800 B.C. While much questioning has naturally been raised

concerning the accuracy and trustworthiness of this date thus obtained, no

valid reasons for discarding it have been presented. It affords a

convenient and useful point from which to reckon backward and forward in the

uncertain periods from the third to the fifth millennium B.C. By all these

aids, to which are added some genealogical statements in the inscriptions,

a series of dynasties has been worked out for this early age, and their

chronological relations to one another tentatively determined.



41. It is possible, therefore, with a reasonable degree of accuracy, to

determine chronologically not only the great turning points in Babylonio-

Assyrian history, but even the majority of the dynasties and the reigns of

the several kings. Founded upon this, the historical structure may be

reared, and its various stages and their relations determined. A bird's-eye

view of these will facilitate further progress. First in order of time comes

the Rise and Development of the City-States of Old Babylonia to their

unification in the City-State of Babylon. In the dawn of history different

primitive centres of population in the lower Tigro-Euphrates valley

appeared, attained a vigorous and expanding life, came into contact one with

another, and successively secured a limited supremacy, only to give place to

others. The process was already in full course by 5000 B.C. By the middle

of the third millennium, the city of Babylon pushed forward under a new

dynasty; one of its kings succeeded in driving out the Elamites, who had

invaded and were occupying the southern and central districts; the victory

was followed by the city's supremacy, which was not only more widely

extended, but, by the wisdom of its kings, was more deeply rooted, and was

thus made permanent. With Babylonia united under Babylon, the first epoch

closed about 2000 B.C.



42. The second period covers the Early Conflicts of Babylonia and

Assyria. The peaceful course of united Babylonia was interrupted by the

entrance of the Kassites from the east, who succeeded in seating a dynasty

of Kassite kings upon the throne of Babylonia, and maintaining them there

for nearly six hundred years. But this foreign intrusion and dominance had

roused into independent life a Semitic community which had its centre at

Assur on the central Tigris, and in all probability was an offshoot from

Babylonia. This centre of active political life developed steadily toward

the north and west, but was dominated chiefly by its hostility toward

Babylonia under Kassite rule. Having become the kingdom of Assyria, it

warred with the southern kingdom, the advantage on the whole remaining with

the Assyrian until, toward the close of the epoch, a great ruler appeared in

the north, Tiglathpileser I., under whom Assyria advanced to the first place

in the Tigro-Euphrates valley; while Babylonia, its Kassite rulers yielding

to a native dynasty, fell into political insignificance. The forces that

controlled the age had run their course by 1000 B.C.



43. The third period is characterized by the Ascendancy of Assyria.

The promise of pre-eminence given in Tiglathpileser I. was not fulfilled for

two centuries, owing to the flooding of the upper Mesopotamian plain with

Aramean nomads from the Arabian steppes. At last, as the ninth century

began, Ashurnacirpal led the way in an onward movement of Assyria which

culminated in the extension of the kingdom over the entire region of western

Asia. Shalmaneser II,, Tiglathpileser III., and Sargon, great generals and

administrators, turned a kingdom into an empire. The first wore out the

resistance of the Syrian states, the second added Babylonia to the Assyrian

Empire, and the third, as conqueror of the north, ruled from the Persian

gulf to the border of Egypt and the upper sea of Ararat. The rulers that

followed compelled Egypt to bow, and reduced Elam to subjection, but at the

expense of the vital powers of the state. New peoples appeared upon the

eastern border, revolt deprived the empire of its provinces, until, in less

than two decades after the death of the brilliant monarch Ashurbanipal,

Nineveh, Assyria's capital, was destroyed, and the empire disappeared

suddenly and forever. Four centuries were occupied with this splendid

history and its tragical catastrophe. The age closed with the passing of

the seventh century (600 B.C.).



44. Of the partners in the overthrow of Assyria, the rebellious

governor of the province of Babylonia received as his share of the spoil the

Tigro-Euphrates valley and the Mediterranean provinces. He founded here the

New Babylonian Empire. Its brief career of less than a century concluded

the history of these peoples. Under his son, the famous Nebuchadrezzar II.,

the empire was consolidated, its resources enlarged, its power displayed.

His feeble successors, however, were beset with manifold difficulties, chief

of which was the rising energy of the Medes and Persians who had shared in

the booty of Assyria. United under the genius of Cyrus, they pushed

westward and northward, until the hour came for advancing on Babylon. The

hollow shell of the empire was speedily crushed, and the Semitic peoples,

whose rulers had dominated this world of western Asia for more than four

millenniums, yielded the sceptre in 538 B.C. to Cyrus the Persian.

Dawn Of History



45. The earliest indications of human settlement in the Tigro-Euphrates

valley come from the lower alluvial plain (sect. 3) known as Babylonia. It

is not difficult to see how the physical features of this region were

adapted to make it a primitive seat of civilization. A burning sun, falling

upon fertile soil enriched and watered by mighty, inundating streams, -

these are conditions in which man finds ready to his hand everything needed

to sustain and stimulate his elemental wants. Superabounding fruitfulness

of nature, plant, animal, and man, contributes to his comfort and progress.

Coming with flocks and herds from the surrounding deserts, he finds ample

pasturage and inexhaustible water everywhere, an oasis inviting him to a

permanent abiding-place. He cannot but abandon his nomadic life for

settlement. The land, however, does not encourage inglorious ease. Wild

nature must be subdued and waste tracts occupied as populations increase.

The inundations are found to occur at regular intervals and to be of

definite duration. They may be regulated and their fruitful waters directed

upon barren soils, making them fertile. All suggests order and requires

organization on the part of those settled along the river banks. From the

same generous source are supplied mud and bitumen for the erection of

permanent dwellings. The energies of the inhabitants of such a country

would naturally be absorbed in developing its abundant resources. They

would be a peaceful folk, given to agriculture. Trade, also, is facilitated

by the rivers, natural highways through the land, and with trade comes

industry, both stimulated by the generous gifts of nature, among which the

palm-tree is easily supreme. Thus, at a time when regions less suggestive

and responsive to human activity lay unoccupied and barren, this favored

spot was inevitably the scene of organized progressive human activity

already engaged upon the practical problems of social and political life.

It furnishes for the history of mankind the most ancient authentic records

at present known.



46. The position of the Babylonian plain is likewise prophetic of its

history. It is an accessible land (sect. 11). Races and civilizations were

to meet and mingle there. It was to behold innumerable political changes

due to invasion and conquest. In turn, the union of peoples was to produce

a strong and abiding social amalgam, capable of absorbing aliens and

preserving their best. This civilization, because it lay thus open to all,

was to contribute widely to the world's progress. It made commercial

highways out of its rivers. The passes of the eastern and northern

mountains were doorways, not merely for invading tribes, but also for

peaceful armies of merchants marching to and from the ends of the world, and

finding their common centre in its cities.



47. At the period when history begins, all these processes of

development were already well advanced. Not only are the beginnings of

civilization in Babylonia quite hidden from our eyes, but the various stages

in the course of that first civilization, extending over thousands of years,

are equally unknown, except as they may be precariously inferred from that

which the beginnings of historical knowledge reveal. The earliest

inscriptions which have been unearthed disclose social and political life

already in full operation. Not only has mankind passed beyond the period of

savage and even pastoral existence, but agriculture is the chief occupation;

the irrigating canals have begun to distribute the river water to the

interior of the land; the population is gathered into settled communities;

cities are built; states are established, ruled over by kings; the arts of

life are developed; language has already been reduced to written form, and

is employed for literary purposes; religion is an essential element of life,

and has its priests and temples.



48. The seat of the most advanced and presumably the most ancient

historical life appears to have been the southernmost part of the Euphrates

valley. As the river reached the gulf, which then stretched more than a

hundred miles northwest of its present shore line, it spread out over the

surrounding country in a shallow sea. Upon the higher ground to the east

and west of the lowlands made marvellously fertile by this natural

irrigation, the earliest cities were planted. Farthest to the south,

presumably close to the gulf and west of the river mouth, was the ancient

Eridu (now Abu Shahrein or Nowawis), the seat of a temple for the worship of

Ea, the god of the waters. Here, no doubt, was told the story of Oannes,

the being that came up daily from the sea to converse with men, to teach

them letters, arts, and sciences, everything which could tend to soften

manners and humanize mankind, and at night returned to the deep, - a myth of

the sun, perhaps, associated with the recollection of the beginnings of

culture in this coast city which, without tradition of political importance,

was hallowed as a primitive centre of civilization and religion. Some ten

miles to the west lay Ur, "the city" (at present called Mugheir), now a few

miles west of the river in the desert, but once, like Eridu, a commercial

city on the gulf. Here was the temple of Sin, the moon god, the ruins of

which rise seventy feet above the plain. Across the river, thirty miles to

the northeast, stood Larsam (now Senkereh), the biblical Ellasar, where the

sun god Shamash had his temple. Twelve miles away to the northwest was

Uruk, the biblical Erech (now Warka), the seat of the worship of the goddess

Ishtar. Mar (now perhaps Tel Ede), a little known site, lay about the same

distance north. Thirty-five miles east of Mar, on the ancient canal now

known as Shatt-el-Hai, connecting the Tigris with the Euphrates, was

Shirpurla, or Lagash (now Tello), looking out across the eastern plain, the

frontier city of the early period, although fifty miles from the Tigris.

These six cities, lying at the four corners of an irregular square, form the

southernmost body of primitive communities already flourishing at the dawn

of history.



49. Situated almost exactly in the centre of the ancient plain between

the rivers, about fifty miles north of Uruk, was the already famous city of

Nippur (now Niffer). Here the patron deity was En-lil, "chief spirit,"

called also Bel, the "lord," god of the terrestrial world. A long period of

prehistoric political prominence must be assumed to explain the religious

prestige of this city and of its god. Religion is its sole distinction at

the time when records begin. But how great must have been that prominence

to have secured for the city a claim to stand with Eridu as one of the two

earliest centres of religion! En-lil was a father of gods, and his fame

made Nippur the shrine where many kings were proud to offer their gifts.



50. North Babylonia had also its group of primitive cities, chief among

which was Kutha (now Tel Ibrahim), the biblical Cuthah, more than fifty

miles northwest of Nippur in the centre of the upper plain. Its god,

Nergal, was lord of the world of the dead. Still further north, not far

from the eastern bank of the Euphrates, was Sippar (now Abu Habba), where

the sun god, Shamash, had his temple, and in its vicinity, probably, was

Agade, once the famous capital of the land of Akkad. More uncertain are the

sites of those northern cities which played an important part in the

political activity of the earlier days, but soon disappeared, Kulunu (the

biblical Calneh), Gishban (?), and Kish. It is a question whether Babylon

and its sister city Borsippa should be included in this enumeration. If

they were in existence, they were insignificant communities at this time,

and their gods, Marduk and Nabu, do not stand high in the ranks of the

earliest deities. The greatness of the two cities was to come, and to

compensate by its splendor for the lateness of their beginnings.



51. Who were the people by whose energy this region was transformed

into so fair and flourishing a land, at a time when elsewhere, with hardly

an exception, the upward course of humanity did not yet reveal any trace of

orderly and civilized conditions? What are their antecedents, and whence

did they come to occupy the alluvial plain? These questions cannot be

satisfactorily answered, because our knowledge of the facts involved is

insufficient and the conclusions drawn from them are contradictory.

Reference has already been made (sect. 26) to the linguistic phenomena of

the early Babylonian inscriptions, and the opposite inferences drawn from

them. The historical facts bearing on the question render a clearer answer,

if also a more limited one. Whatever may be the conjectures based upon them

as to prehistoric conditions and movements, these facts at the beginning of

history testify that the civilization was that of a Semitic people.

Inscriptions of an undoubtedly Semitic character are there, and the social,

political, and religious phenomena presented by them have nothing that

clearly demonstrates a non-Semitic character. Nor do any inscriptions,

myths, or traditions testify, indubitably, either to a pre-Semitic

population, or to the superimposing upon it of the Semitic stock. To the

historian, therefore, the problem resolves itself into this: how and when

did the Semitic people begin to occupy this Babylonian plain? As the

consensus of judgment to-day seems to favor Central Arabia as the primitive

home of the Semites, their advent into Babylonia must have been made from

the west, by moving either upward, from the western side of the Persian

gulf, or downward, along the Euphrates, - a drift from the desert as steady

and continuous as the sand that creeps over the Babylonian border from the

same source. When this movement began can only be conjectured from the

length of time presumably required to develop the civilization which existed

as early as 5000 B.C., back to which date the earliest materials must

certainly be carried. The processes already indicated as having preceded

this time (sects. 45, 47), suggest to what distant ages the incoming of the

first settlers must be assigned.



52. The Babylonian primitive civilization did not stand alone or

isolated in this dawn of history. It lay in the midst of a larger world,

with some regions of which it had already entered into relations. To the

northwest, along the Euphrates, nomadic tribes still wandered, although

there are indications that, on the upper river, in the vicinity of the old

city of Haran, a Semitic culture was already appearing. The Bedouin of the

western desert hung on the frontier as a constant menace, or wandered into

the cultivated land to swell the Semitic population. To the north, along

the eastern banks of the upper Tigris, and on the flanks of the mountains

were centres of primitive organization, as among the Guti and the Lulubi,

whose kings, some centuries later, left Semitic inscriptions. But

particularly active and aggressive were the people of the highlands east of

Babylonia known by the collective name of Elam. The country sloped gently

down to the Tigris, and was watered by streams descending from the hills.

The people were hardy and warlike. They had already developed or acquired

from their neighbors across the river the elements of organization and

civilization. Through their borders ran the trade-routes from the east.

Among the earliest memorials of history are evidences of their active

interference in Babylonian affairs, in which they were to play so important

a part in the future. Commerce was to bring more distant places into the

circle of Babylonian life. On the borders, to the south, were the ports of



southern Arabia; far to the west, the peoples of the Mediterranean coast-

lands were preparing to receive the visits of traders from the Euphrates;

while at the end of the then known world was the rich and progressive nation

in the valley of the Nile, already, perhaps, indebted to the dwellers in

Babylonia for impulses toward civilization, which they were themselves to

carry to so high a point in the ages to come.

Movements Toward Expansion And Unification



53. The cities whose existence at the dawn of history has already been

noted, were, from the first, full of vigorous activity. The impulses which

led to the organization of social life sought further development. Cities

enlarged, came into touch with their neighbors, and sought to dominate them.

The varying success of these movements, the rise, splendor, and decay of the

several communities, their struggles with one another, and the ever-renewed

activity which carried them beyond the confines of Babylonia itself, make up

the first chapter in the story. It is impossible to give a connected and

detailed account of the period, owing to the scantiness of the materials and

the difficulty of them chronologically. The excavations of the last quarter

of a century have only begun to suggest the wealth of inscriptions and

archaeological matter which will be at the disposal of the future student.

Much new light has been gained which makes it possible to take general

views, to trace tendencies, and to prepare tentative outlines which

discoveries and investigations still to come will fill up and modify.



54. Some general titles borne by rulers of the period afford a striking

evidence of the character of this early development. Three of these are

worthy of special mention, namely, "King of Shumer and Akkad," "King of the

Totality (world)," "King of the Four (world-) Regions." It is evident that

two of these titles, and possibly all, refer to districts and not to cities,

although great uncertainty exists as to their exact geographical position.

The second and third would suggest universal empire, though they might be

localized upon particular regions. The "Kingdom of the Totality" is thought

by Winckler and other scholars to have its centre in northern Mesopotamia

about the city of Haran. "Shumer and Akkad" are regarded as including the

northern and southern parts of Babylonia. The "Four Regions," synonymous

with the four points of the compass, would include the known world from the

eastern mountains and the Persian gulf to the Mediterranean. Whatever may

be learned in the future respecting the exact content of these titles, they

illustrate the impulses and tendencies which were already potent in these

primitive communities.



55. This period of expansion and unification occupies more than two

millenniums (about 4500-2250 B.C.). Three stages may be distinguished in

what may truly be called this wilderness of years. (1) The first is marked

by the struggles of cities within Babylonia for local supremacy. The chief

rivalry lay between those of the north and those of the south. (2) With the

career of Sargon I. (3800 B.C.), a new era opened, characterized by the

extension of authority beyond the borders of Babylonia as far as the

Mediterranean and the northern mountains, while yet local supremacy shifted

from city to city. (3) The third epoch, which is, at the same time, the

termination of the period and the opening of a new age, saw the final

consolidation of Babylonian authority at home and abroad in the city-king of

Babylon, which henceforth gave its name to land and government and



civilization. In each of these ages, some names of rulers stand out as

fixed points in the vast void, gaps of unknown extent appear, and historic

relations between individual actors upon the wide stage are painfully

uncertain. Some account in the barest outline may be given of these kings,

in some cases hardly more than shadows, whom the progress of investigation

will in time clothe with flesh and blood, and assign the place and

significance due to their achievements.



56. The struggle has already begun when the first known king,

Enshagsagana (about 4500 B.C.) of Kengi, probably southwestern Babylonia,

speaks of offering to the god of Nippur the spoil of Kish, "wicked of

heart." Somewhat later the representative of the south in the wars with the

northern cities, Kish and Gishban, was Shirpurla (sect. 48). Mesilim of

Kish (about 4400 B.C.) made Shirpurla a vassal kingdom. It recovered under

the dynasty of Ur Nina (about 4200 B.C.), who called himself king, while his

successors were satisfied with the title of patesi, or viceroy. Two of

these successors of Ur Nina, Eannatum (Edingiranagin) and Entemena, have

left inscriptions of some length, describing their victories over cities of

the north and south. Gishban, rivalling Kish in its hostility to the south,

found a vigorous antagonist in Eannatum, whose famous "Vulture Stele"

contains the terms imposed by him upon the patesi of that city.



Not long after, a king of Gishban, Lugalzaggisi (about 4000 B.C.),

proclaimed himself "king of Uruk, king of the Totality," brought also Ur and

Larsam under his sway, and offered his spoil at the sacred shrine of Nippur.

He was practically lord of Babylonia. His inscription, moreover, goes on to

declare that "from the lower sea of the Tigris and Euphrates to the upper

sea (his god) made straight his path; from the rising of the sun to the

setting of the same he gave him tribute." His authority extended from the

Persian gulf to the Mediterranean. A later king of Kish, Alusharshid (about

3850 B.C.), wrote upon marble vases which he offered at Nippur, his boast of

having subjugated Elam and Bara'se, the elevated plains to the east and

northeast of Babylonia.



57. It is tempting to generalize upon these six centuries and more of

history. The most obvious fact has already been mentioned, namely, that the

movement toward expansion, incorporation, and unification is in full course.

But more definite conclusions may be reached. There are those who see, in

the arraying of north against south, the inevitable reaction of a ruder

civilization against an older and higher one. The earlier culture of the

south, and its more fully developed organization had pressed upon the

northern communities and attempted to absorb them in the process of giving

them civilization. But gradual decay sapped the strength of the southern

states, and the hardier peoples of the north, having learned the arts of

their conquerors, thirsted for their riches, and at last succeeded in

overthrowing them. A more definite view is that which beholds in the

aggressions of north upon south the steady advance of the Semitic people

upon the Sumerians (sect. 26), and the process of fastening the yoke of

Semitic political supremacy upon Babylonia, with the accompanying absorption

of Sumerian culture by the conquerors. Another conclusion (that of Radau,

Early Babylonian History) finds the Semites coming in from the south at the

very beginning of the period and pushing northward beyond the confines of

Babylonia. Then the Semites of the south, having become corrupted by the

higher civilization of the Sumerians, were objects of attack on the part of

the more virile Semites of the north who, turning back upon their former

track, came down and occupied the seats of their brethren and renewed the

purer Semitic element. There may be some truth in all these

generalizations, but the positions are so opposed, and their foundations are

as yet so precarious, that assent to their definite details must, for the

present, be withheld from all of them.



58. Shargani-shar-ali, or, as he is more commonly called, Sargon I.,

king of the city of Agade (sect. 50), introduces the second stage in early

Babylonian history. His son, Naram Sin, is said by Nabuna'id, the last king

of the New Babylonian Empire, to have reigned three thousand two hundred

years before his own time, that is, about 3750 B.C. Sargon lived,

therefore, about 3800 B.C., the first date fixed, with reasonable certainty,

in Babylonian history, and a point of departure for earlier and later

chronology (sect. 40). The inscriptions coming directly from Sargon himself

and his son are few and historically unimportant. Some, found at Nippur,

indicate that both were patrons of the temple and worshippers of its god.

A tablet of omens, written many centuries after their time, ascribes to them

a wide range of activity and splendid achievement. While such a document

may contain a legendary element, the truth of its testimony in general is

substantiated by similar statements recorded in contract tablets of the

Sargonic age. The very existence of such legends testifies to the

impression made by these kings on succeeding generations. An interesting

example of this type of document is the autobiographical fragment which

follows:



Sargon, the powerful king, King of Agade, am I.

My mother was of low degree, my father I did not know.

The brother of my father dwelt in the mountain.

My city was Azupirani, situate on the bank of the Euphrates.

(My) humble mother conceived me; in secret she brought me forth.

She placed me in a basket-boat of rushes; with pitch she closed my

door.

She gave me over to the river, which did not (rise) over me.

The river bore me along; to Akki, the irrigator, it carried me.

Akki, the irrigator, in the . . . brought me to land.

Akki, the irrigator, reared me as his own son.

Akki, the irrigator, appointed me his gardener.

While I was gardener, Ishtar looked on me with love [and]

. . . four years I ruled the kingdom.



(Assyrian and Babylonian Literature, p. 1.)



59. Sargon was a great conqueror. Within Babylonia, he was lord of

Nippur, Shirpurla, Kish, Babylon, and Uruk. Beyond its borders, he and his

son carried their arms westward to the Mediterranean, northward into

Armenia, eastward into Elam and among the northeastern peoples, and

southward into Arabia and the islands of the Persian gulf. To illustrate

the character of these wars, reference may be made to the omen tablet,

which, under the seventh omen, records a three years' campaign on the

Mediterranean coast, during which Sargon organized his conquests, erected

his images, and carried back the spoil to his own land. Possessed of so

wide authority, Naram Sin assumed the proud title, for the first time

employed by a Babylonian ruler, "King of the Four (world-) Regions."



60. The achievements of these kings were both a culmination of the

activities of the earlier city-kings, and a model for those who followed.

The former had from time to time gathered parts of the larger world under

their own sway, as Lugalzaggisi the west, and Alusharshid the east. But the

incorporation of the whole into a single empire was the work of the

Sargonids, and no dynasty followed which did not strive after this ideal.

The immediate descendants of Naram Sin, however, have left no monuments to

indicate that they maintained their fathers' glory, and the dynasty of Agade

disappeared in a darkness which stretches over nearly half a millennium.

The scene shifts once more to Shirpurla. Here the patesi Ur Bau (about 3500

B.C.) ruled peacefully, and was followed by other princes, whose chief

distinction in their own eyes was the building of temples and the service of

the gods. Foremost among these in the number of inscriptions and works of

art which commemorate his career, was Gudea (about 3100 B.C.). The only

warlike deed recorded by him was his conquest of Anshan in Elam, but the

wide range of countries laid under contribution for materials to build his

temples and palaces has led to the conviction that he must have been an

independent and vigorous ruler. The absence of any royal titles in his

inscriptions, however, coupled with the slight reference to military

expeditions, suggests, rather, that his building operations were made

possible because his state formed part of the domains of a broad empire,

like that which Sargon founded and his successors ruled.



61. Peace, however, in an oriental state is the sign of weakness, and

the extensive works of Gudea may have exhausted the resources of Shirpurla

so that, after a few generations, its patesis acknowledged the sway of the

kings of Ur, who came forward to make a new contribution to the unification

of Babylonia. Ur Gur of Ur and his son Dungi (about 3000 B.C.) were, like

their predecessors of Shirpurla, chiefly proud of their temples, if the

testimony of the great mass of the inscriptions from them may be accepted.

But they are distinguished from Gudea in that they built their temples in

all parts of the land of Babylonia, from Kutha in the north to Shirpurla,

Nippur, Uruk, and Ur in the south. The title which they assumed, that of

"King of Shumer and Akkad," now first employed by Babylonian kings,

indicates that the end which they had attained was the union of all

Babylonia, north and south, under one sceptre. The building of the various

temples in the cities was the evidence both of their interest in the welfare

of the whole land and of their authority over it. They realized the ideal

which ruled all succeeding dynasties, namely, a united Babylonia, although

it is probable that their authority over the different districts was often

very slight. Patesis still maintained themselves in Shirpurla and,

doubtless, elsewhere, although they acknowledged the supremacy of the king

of Ur. It is not without reason, therefore, that two dynasties ruling in

other cities are assigned to the period immediately following that of the

dynasty of Ur. These are a dynasty of Uruk, consisting of kings Singashid

and Singamil the former of whom calls himself also king of Amnanu, and a

dynasty of Isin, a city of southern Babylonia, whose site is as yet unknown.

The latter group of kings claimed authority also over Nippur, Ur, Eridu, and

Uruk, and called themselves "Kings of Shumer and Akkad." As such, they would

be successors of the kings of Ur, in control of united Babylonia.



62. Ur came forward again after some generations and dominated the land

under a dynasty whose founder was Gungunu; its members were Ine Sin, Bur Sin

II., Gimil Sin, some others less known, and, probably, a second Dungi (about

2800-2500 B.C.). The various forms of titles attached to some of the kings

of Ur have led some scholars to group them in several dynasties, but the

evidence is not at present sufficient. The kings above mentioned,

considered together, are no longer called kings of Shumer and Akkad, but

bear the prouder title of "King of the Four Regions." Our knowledge of their

activities fully justifies them in assuming it. Numerous contract tablets,

dated from events in their reigns, testify to campaigns in Syria, Arabia,

and Elam. The most vigorous of these rulers was Dungi II., who reigned more

than fifty years. He built temples in various cities, made at least nine

expeditions into the west, and seems to have placed members of his own

family as governors in the conquered cities, if one may trust the

interpretation of inscriptions to the effect that his daughters were

appointed rulers in Syria and Anshan. He was worshipped as a god after his

death, and his successors named the eighth month of the year in his honor.

This dynasty may, not unreasonably, be regarded as one of the most notable

thus far ruling in Babylonia, uniting, as it did, authority over the

homeland with vigorous movement into the surrounding regions, and control

over the east and the west.



63. A period of some confusion followed the passing of this sovereignty

of Ur (about 2400-2200 B.C.). A dynasty of the city of Babylon, the first

recorded by the priests in the dynastic tablets, was founded by Sumu-abu

(about 2400 B.C.) and contested the worldwide supremacy of Ur. Larsam was

the seat of another kingdom, the first king of which was Nur Adad, who was

succeeded by his son Siniddinam. The latter called himself "king of Shumer

and Akkad," as though he would again bring about that unity which had

disappeared with the downfall of Ur. But other movements were preparing

which, apparently threatening the overthrow of Babylonian civilization and

governments as a whole, were to bring about an ultimate and permanent

establishment of Babylonian unity. The Elamites upon the eastern highlands,

between whom and the communities of eastern Babylonia war had been frequent,

and who had been more than once partially conquered, reacted under the

pressure and entered the land, bent upon conquest. The souther cities

suffered the most severely from this inroad, as they lay nearest the line of

advance of the invading peoples. At first the Elamites raided the cities

and carried off their booty to their own land, but later were able to

establish themselves in Babylonian territory. How early these incursions

began is quite uncertain. In the fragments of Berosus, a "Median" dynasty

of eight kings is mentioned the approximate date of which is from 2450 B.C.

to 2250 B.C. This statement may vaguely suggest the presence of Elamites in

Babylonia during two centuries, and the culmination of their inroads in the

possession of supreme authority over at least part of the land. That new

dynasties appeared in Babylon and Larsam, succeeding to that of Ur about

2400 B.C., may have some connection with these inroads, and inscriptional

evidence makes it certain that Elamite supremacy was felt in Babylonia by

2300 B.C. Native dynasties disappeared before the onslaught. One of these

invading bodies was led by King Kudurnankhundi, whose exploits are referred

to by the Assyrian king of the seventh century, Ashurbanipal. The Elamite

had carried away a statue of the goddess Nana from Uruk 1635 years before,

that is, about 2290 B.C. Ashurbanipal restored it to its temple. The

region in which Uruk and Larsam were situated seems to have borne the brunt

of the assault. The former city was devastated and its temples sacked. The

latter became a centre of Elamite power. A prince whose Semitic name is

read Rim Sin, the son of a certain Kudurmabuk, ruler of Iamutbal, a district

of west Elam, set up his kingdom at Larsam, apparently on the overthrow of

Siniddinam, and for at least a quarter of a century (about 2275 B.C.) made

himself a power in southern Babylonia. He claimed authority over Ur, Eridu,

Nippur, Shirpurla, and Uruk, conquered Isin, and called himself "king of

Shumer and Akkad." Evidently the Elamite element was well on the way toward

absorption into Babylonian life.



64. What the Elamites really brought to pass in Babylonia was a general

levelling of the various southern city-states which had contested the

supremacy with one another. Their rulers overthrown, their people enslaved,

their possessions carried away, rude foreigners dominating them, they were

no longer in a position to maintain the ancient rivalry with one another, or

to contest the supremacy with the cities of the north. When the foreigners

had weakened themselves by amalgamation with the conquered and by accepting

their religion and culture, the way was opened for a purely Babylonian

power, hitherto but slightly affected by these invasions, to drive out the

enemy, and bring the whole land under one authority which might hope for

permanence. This power was the city-state of Babylon.



65. It is tempting to seek further light on this Elamite period from

two other sources. The first of these is the native religious literature.

In the so-called omen tablets and the hymns, are not infrequent references

to troubles from the Elamites. A hymn, associated with Uruk (RP, 2 ser. I.

pp. 84 ff.), lamenting a misfortune which has fallen upon the city, is, by

some scholars, connected with the expedition of Kudurnankhundi (sect. 63).

In one of the episodes of the Gilgamesh epic (sect. 28), the deliverance of



Uruk from a foreign enemy, Khumbaba, forms the background of the scene. It

may embody a tradition of this period, and preserve the name of another

Elamite invader. But the allusions are all too indefinite to serve any

historical purpose other than as illustrations of the reality and severity

of invasions from Elam. The Hebrew religious literature has also furnished

material which is thought to bear on this epoch. In Genesis xiv. it is

said, "It came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king

of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of Goiim; that they

made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab

king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela. . . .

Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they

rebelled. And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that

were with him." In the situation here depicted, and the names of the kings

and localities mentioned, have been found grounds for assigning the episode

to the Elamite period of Babylonian history. Arioch of Ellasar would be Rim

Sin (in another reading of his name, Eri-Aku) of Larsam; Amraphel of Shinar

is identified with Khammurabi of Babylon; Tidal of Goiim, with Thargal of

Gutium; while Chedorlaomer is a good Elamite name in the form Kudurlagamar.

On this hypothesis, the latter would be the overlord of the Babylonian kings

and the heir to the Babylonian authority over Syria and Palestine which had

been maintained by Sargon and others of the earlier time. All this is not

improbable, and adds interest to our study of this dark period, but it is

not sufficiently substantiated, either by the connection in which it stands,

or by the evidence of contemporaneous Babylonian material, to warrant the

acceptance of it as actual historical fact. It is true that names similar

to these have also been found in Babylonian tablets of various periods, but

the reading of the texts is not so certain, or their relation to this epoch



so clear, as to offer any substantial support to the narrative.

ivilization Of Old Babylonia: Political And Social Life



66. While the materials for sketching the historical development of the

early Babylonian communities are often quite inadequate, fragmentary, and

difficult to organize, those which illustrate the life of the people are not

only more numerous, but they also afford a more complete picture. To

present a history of the civilization in its progress is, indeed, equally

impossible, but, as a compensation, it may be remembered that oriental life

in antiquity passed through few changes. Kings and empires might flourish

and disappear, but manners, customs, and occupations continued from century

to century much as they had been in the beginning. Therefore it is possible

to gather up in a single view the various aspects of the civilization of

this people which, in its political career of more than two thousand years,

was subject to the vicissitudes which the preceding chapters have described.



67. The earliest occupations of the inhabitants were agricultural.

Great flocks of sheep and herds of cattle and goats, enumerated in the lists

of temple property, indicate that pastoral activities were not neglected.

Herdsmen and shepherds formed a numerous class, recruited from the Bedouin

constantly floating in from the desert. The chief grazing-grounds were to

the west of the Euphrates. Here were gathered together herds belonging to

different owners under the care of independent herdsmen who were paid to

watch and protect their charges. But the raising of grain and fruits was by

far more common, as might be expected from the nature of the country. The

yield from the fertile soil was often two hundred-fold, sometimes more. All

Babylonian life was affected by this predominating activity. The need of

irrigation of the fields fostered an immense development of the canal

system. At first, the lands nearest the rivers were watered by the

primitive devices even now employed on their banks. It was a genial thought

of King Urukagina to construct a canal, and wisely did he name it after the

goddess Nina (Records of the Past, 2 ser. I. p. 72), for the work was worthy

of divine approval. Soon the canal became the characteristic feature of the

Babylonian landscape and the chief condition of agricultural prosperity.

Land was named according to that which it produced, and some scholars hold

that it was measured according to the amount of seed which could be sown

upon it. At least three of the months had names connected with agriculture.

The fruits of the fields were the chief gifts to the temples, and the king

exacted his taxes in grain which was stored in royal granaries. It seems

that the agricultural year began in September (the month tashritu,

"beginning"). Then the farmer, usually a tenant of a rich noble, made his

contract. The rent was ordinarily one-third of the farm's production,

although sometimes tenant and landlord divided equally. Great care was

taken that the tenant should keep everything in good order. Oxen were used

for farm-work, and numerous agricultural implements were employed. Sowing

and reaping, ploughing and threshing, irrigating and cultivating, - these

constituted the chief events in the lives of the great mass of the

Babylonian people, and made their land one of the richest and most

prosperous regions in all the world.



68. The pursuits of industry appear from the beginning to have engaged

the activities of the Babylonians. Differentiation of labor has already

taken place, and the names of the workers illustrate the variety of the

occupations. The inscriptions mention the carpenter, the smith, the metal-

worker, the weaver, the leather-worker, the dyer, the potter, the brick-

maker, the vintner, and the surveyor. The abundance of wool led very early

to the manufacture of woollen cloths and rugs, in which the Babylonians

surpassed all others. The city of Mar (sect. 48) was famous for a kind of

cloth, called after it Mairatu. Gold, silver, copper, and bronze were

worked up into articles of ornament and utility. The making of bricks was

a most important industry in a country where stone was practically

unobtainable. The month simanu (May-June) was the "month of bricks," during

which the conditions for their manufacture were most favorable; inundations

had brought down the sifted alluvium which lay conveniently at hand; the sun

shone mildly enough to bake the clay slowly and evenly; the reeds, used as

a platform on which to lay the bricks for drying, or chopped finely and

mixed with the clay, were fresh and abundant. Innumerable quantities were

used yearly. Sun-dried bricks were poor building material, and houses

needed constant repairing or rebuilding after the heavy rains of the winter.

The bricks baked in the kiln, of much more durable character, were used for

the outer lining of temples and palaces.



69. The position of Babylonia gave it commercial importance, the

evidences of which go back to the earliest times. Its central and

accessible position, its wealth in natural products of an indispensable

kind, its early industrial activity, all contributed to this end. Its lack

of some materials of an equally indispensable character was an additional

motive for exchange. Over the Persian gulf teak-wood found at Eridu was

brought from India. Cotton also made its way from the same source to the

southern cities. Over Arabia, by way of Ur, which stood at the foot of a

natural opening from the desert, and owed its early fame and power, it may

be, in no small degree, to its consequent commercial importance, were led

the caravans laden with stone, spices, copper, and gold from Sinai, Yemen,

and Egypt. Door-sockets of Sinaitic stone found at Nippur attest this

traffic. To the north led the natural highways afforded by the rivers, and

from thence, at the dawn of history, the city-kings brought cedar-wood from

the Syrian mountains for the adornment of palaces and temples. From the

East, down the pass of Holwan, came the marble and precious metal of the

mountains. Much of this raw material was worked over by Babylonian

artisans, and shipped back to the less favored lands, along with the grain,

dates, and fish, the rugs and cloths, of native production. All this

traffic was in the hands of Babylonian traders who fearlessly ventured into

the borders of distant countries, and must have carried with them thither

the knowledge of the civilization and wealth of their own home, for only

thus can the wide-spread influence of Babylonian culture in the earliest

periods be explained.



70. Babylonian society was well differentiated. At the basis of it lay

the slave population, the necessary condition of all economic activity in

antiquity. Slaves were employed upon the farms, by the manufacturers and in

the temples. The sources of the supply were various. War furnished many;

others had fallen from the position of free laborers; still others were

purchased from abroad, or were children of native bondsmen. Rich private

owners or temple corporations made a business of hiring them out as

laborers. They were humanely treated; the law protected them from injury;

they could earn money, hold property, and thus purchase their freedom. Laws

exist which suggest that young children could not be separated from their

slave-parents in case of the sale of the latter. Next in the scale stood

the free laborer who hired himself out for work like that of the slave, and

was his natural competitor. How he could continue to secure higher wages -

as seems to be the case - is a problem which Peiser thinks explicable from

the fact that his employer was not liable for damages in case of an injury,

nor forced to care for him if he were sick. In both of these situations the

law secured the reimbursement and protection of the slave (Mitteilungen der

Vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft, 1896, 3), who could therefore safely work

for less money. There are some references to wages in the contracts of the

time which indicate that the free laborer received from four to six shekels

($3.00 to $4.50) a year, and food. He made a written contract with his

employer, in which were specified the rate and the length of time of

employment. It is evident, however, that such laborers must have been few

in comparison with slaves, and have steadily declined toward the lower

position. The tenant-farmer must have been an important constituent of the

social body, although he does not play a very prominent part. He rented the

farm, hired the laborers, and superintended the agricultural operations.

Great proprietors seem to have preferred the method of cultivating their

estates by tenant-farmers, as many contracts of this kind attest. Of the

rent paid in kind mention has been made. The free peasant proprietor had by

this time well-nigh disappeared before the rich and aristocratic landowner,

and the tenant-farmer had taken his place. In the cities tradesmen and

artisans were found in great numbers, and held in high esteem. Whether at

this time they had been formed into guilds according to their several

trades, as was the case later, is uncertain. Merchants had their business

organized; firms carried on their mercantile operations from generation to

generation, records of which have been preserved; and this class of citizens

must have been increasingly influential. At the summit of the social system

was the aristocracy, headed by the king. The nobles lived on their estates

and at the court of the king, alternately. The scanty evidence suggests

that they held their estates from the king by a kind of feudal tenure. They

owed military service and tribute. They had numerous dependants and slaves

who labored for them and in turn enjoyed their protection.



71. The right of holding private property in land was already in force

in Babylonia. It may be that pasture-land was still held in common, and the

custom of deeding property to a son or adopted slave, on condition of the

parent receiving his support during his lifetime from the property, is a

relic of the transition from family to individual ownership. The king,

theoretic owner by divine right of all the land, had long ago distributed it

among his vassals, either in fee or perpetual possession. Careful surveys

were made, and inscribed stones, set up on the limits of a property,

indicated the possessor and invoked the curse of the gods on any who should

interfere with property rights. Ground could be leased or handed down by

will. In a community where trade was so important, wealth other than in

land was common. Grain and manufactured goods, stored in warehouses in the

cities, and precious metals formed no small part of the resources of the

citizens. There still survived, in some transactions, payment in kind,

grain or cattle; but in general the use of metals for exchange was in vogue.

Naturally they became standards of value. They were weighed out and

fashioned in bars. The shekel, weighing somewhat more than half an ounce

avoirdupois, the mina of sixty shekels, and the talent of sixty minas were

the standard weights, though there were other systems in use. Money was

loaned, at first on condition of the borrower performing a certain amount of

labor for it, later on an agreement to pay interest, usually at a very high

rate.



72. On the whole, Babylonia life from the material point of view must

have been active and agreeable. Cities were protected by high and thick

walls to guard against enemies. Some sort of local organization existed for

town government. Houses were simple and low, built with thick mud walls and

flat roofs of reeds and mud. The streets were narrow and dirty, the

receptacles of all the sweepings of the houses. When the street filled up

to the level of the house doors, these were closed, the house built up

another story, the floor raised to correspond, and a new door provided.

Many houses were manufactories and shops at the same time, the merchant

having his slaves or laborers do their work on the premises. On higher

points stood the palaces of nobles and king, or the stately temples of the

patron gods. In the country, the houses of the proprietors were surrounded

by palm-trees and gardens. The furniture was very simple, - chair and stool

to sit on by day, and a mat on which to sleep at night, flint and metal

knives and a few terra-cotta bowls and jars for cooking and eating purposes,

the oven for baking, and the fire-stick for kindling the fire. For food,

the Babylonian had his inevitable grain and dried fish; the grain he ground

and ate in round cakes seasoned with dates or other fruit; his drink was

wine and beer. To wear much clothing in such a land was a super-fluity.

Rulers are depicted with quilted skirts reaching to the ankles, with no

upper garment or headgear. Others wear thick flat quilted caps. Naram Sin

of Agade appears in a pointed hat with tunic thrown over his left shoulder

and breast. Less important personages have hardly more than the loincloth.

As for hair and beard, men of the earliest period seem to have been smoothly

shaven, unless one is to suppose that the artist felt himself unequal to

representing hair. Later, by the time of Sargon, the beard and hair are

worn long, and the custom continued to be followed.



73. An important element of early Babylonian society was the family.

It had its laws and its religion. While private property was recognized,

yet often the consent of the family was required for the sale of land

belonging to one of its circle. The father was already the recognized head.

Some traces of a primitive right of the mother exist, but they are survivals

of what is quite antiquated. Ancient laws, preserved in late copies,

illustrate family relations which long prevailed:



If a son say to his father, "Thou art not my father," he can cut off

(his locks), make him a slave, and sell him for money. If a son say to his

mother, "Thou art not my mother," she can cut off his locks, turn him out of

town, or (at least) drive him away from home (i. e., she can have him

deprived of citizenship and of inheritance, but his liberty he loses not).

If a father say to his son, "Thou art not my son," the latter has to leave

house and field (i. e., he loses everything). If a mother say to her son,

"Thou art not my son," he shall leave house and furniture (ABL, p. 445).



Giving in marriage was an affair of the father, and was entirely on a

mercantile basis. The prospective bridegroom paid a stipulated sum for his

bride, varying according to his wealth, sometimes a shekel, sometimes a

mina. Some religious ceremonies accompanied the marriage celebration. The

wife usually brought a dowry to her husband. Polygamy and concubinage were

not uncommon. The wife was completely under her husband's control. In

certain circumstances she could be sold as a slave, or put to death.

Divorce was very easy, since the husband had merely to bid the wife depart,

giving her a writ of divorcement. The only restraint, and that probably a

strong one, in the case of a Babylonian, was that he was generally required

to restore to the wife the value of her dowry. Sometimes by contract the

wife had the control of her property, and was thereby in a much better

position. To have children was the supreme end of marriage, and sterility

was a serious misfortune. In that case adoption was a not uncommon

recourse, accomplished by carefully drawn up legal forms. Children thus

adopted had full rights. Adoption also was evidently an easy way of

obtaining additional hands for service at home and in the fields, being

really another form of hiring servants; hence often an adult was thus taken

into a family.



74. The position occupied by the family in the social sphere was taken

by the state in the domain of political life. It is held that the state was

formed out of the union of families, indeed was a greater family with the

king as father at its head (Peiser, MVAG, 1896, 3). In its first

recognizable form, however, the state was a city gathered about a temple,

the centre of worship. As has already been noted (sect. 48), each of the

city-states of Babylonia had its god with whom its interests were

identified. Religion, therefore, was fundamental in Babylonian politics,

the bond of civic unity, the ground of political rights, authority, and

progress. With it, no doubt, was also closely associated the economic

element. The dependence of prosperity, and even of life itself, upon the

proper regulation of the water supply encouraged settlement in the most

favorable localities, and required organization of the activities centred

there. Only by co-operation under a central authority could the canals be

kept open, due regard be paid to the claims of all upon the common supply,

and dangers from flood or famine be grappled with energetically and in time

to safeguard the common interests. Self-protection from enemies contributed

to the same end. The nomads from the desert and the mountain tribes of the

east were equally eager to enjoy the fruits of the fertile Babylonian

fields; their inhabitants must needs combine to ward off inroads from all

sides. All these elements entered into and modified the character and

course of Babylonian politics, and they gave a particular firmness and

prominence to the idea of the state into which, from the earliest period,

all family, clan, and tribal interests had been completely merged.



75. These Babylonian city-states have kings at their head. The

earliest name given to the ruler is patesi, a term which is most

satisfactorily explained as having a religious significance, and as

testifying to the fundamental position and prerogative of the ruler as a

priest of the city god. It suggests that, in the primitive Babylonian

community, the place of supreme importance and influence was occupied by the

priest as the representative of deity, as the mediator between the clans and

the gods on whom they depended. The attitude and activity of the early

kings confirm this suggestion. They are, first of all, pious worshippers of

the gods. They build temples and adorn them with the wealth of their

kingdoms. They bestow upon the gods the richest gifts. The favor of deity

is their supremest desire. Piety is their highest virtue. The duties of

religion are an indispensable and interminable element of their life.

Before the gods they come, as dependants and slaves, to make their

offerings. They are girded about with burdensome ritual restrictions, the

violation of which would entail disaster upon themselves and their people,

and to which, therefore, they conform with constant alacrity and even with

zeal. On the other hand, they claim before their subjects regard and

reverence due to these intimate divine relations. Their inscriptions

declare that they are nourished on the milk of the gods, or are their

offspring, sons begotten of them; that power and sovereignty are by right of

divine descent or appointment. It is not wonderful that, while these rulers

placed their statues in the temples to be constantly before the eye of

deity, their subjects should offer them divine homage. Indeed, from the

time of Sargon of Agade, kings claim to be gods and do not hesitate to

prefix the sign of divinity to their names (Radau, Early Babylonian History,

pp. 307 ff.). All these prerogatives, however, do not free them from

responsibility to their subjects, but rather intensify the expectations

centred in them. They must obtain divine blessing for the state; they must

themselves battle in defence of their people. Thus the Babylonian king is

a warrior, going out to protect his dominions against wild beasts or hostile

men. To kill the lion or the wild ox is an indispensable part of his

duties, and he goes forth in the strength of the gods for these heroic

struggles. He is as proud of the trophies of the chase as of those of the

battlefield, and both alike he dedicates to the divine powers by whose aid

he has conquered. He represents, also, the more peaceful interests of the

state as the patron of industry; he appears like king Ur Nina, with the

basket of the mason on his head, or rehearses his services in opening new

canals, building granaries, and importing foreign trees to beautify and

enrich the land, thus establishing his claim to be the father and shepherd

of his people.



76. The constitution of a state ruled by a king with such prerogatives

and position is naturally summed up in the ruler. The citizen, while he

expects protection and justice, is a subject; the officials are the king's

dependants; his will is law; and the strength of the state depends upon the

personality of its head. Yet it is also true that, where industry and

commerce were so early and so highly developed as in Babylonia, the

arbitrariness of the ruler was modified by the necessity of a well-ordered

and strictly administered body of constitutional principles. Trade was

dependent on the admission and protection of foreigners while in the

country, and they seem to have had no difficulty in securing citizenship,

and even in obtaining official positions. The revenues were secured by

various systems of taxation. Surveys of state property were made, on the

basis of which land taxes were levied. The temples took their tithe.

Customs duties were paid at the city gate. In time of war, the king rode in

his chariot at the head of his troops, as illustrated in the stele of the

Vultures, where Edingiranagin (sects. 56, 85) holds in his hand the curved

weapon for throwing, and his warriors are armed with spears. At the close

of the battle he beats out the brains of captives with his club in honor of

the gods. The city of the same king seems to have possessed a coat of arms,

"the lion-headed eagle with outspread wings," its claws in the backs of two

lions, significant of the corporate consciousness of the state even at this

early day.



77. But what shows most clearly the idea of political organization as

established in Babylonia is the legal system. Fragments of law codes are

still in existence governing the relations of the family (sect. 73), and,

from the abundance of legal documents containing decisions, agreements,

penalties, etc., might be drawn up a body of law which bore on such various

topics as adoption, exchange, marriage, divorce, stealing, adultery, and

other crimes, renting and sale of property, inheritance, loans, partnership,

slavery, and interest. No business arrangement seems to have been complete

without a written contract, signed by the parties concerned in the presence

of witnesses, who also affixed their signatures to the document. Should a

difficulty or question in dispute arise, the contestants had several methods

of procedure. They could choose an arbitrator by whose decision they agreed

to abide; or, sometimes, the complainant appealed to the king, who with his

elders heard the complaint and rendered judgment. Sometimes a court of

judges was established, before which cases were brought. Whatever was the

process, the decision, when rendered, was written down in all the fulness

and formality of legal phraseology, duly signed and sealed with the finger-

nail or the private or official seal of all the parties. That the king

himself was not above the law, at least in the ideal conception of political

philosophers of the time, may be concluded from an ancient bit of political

wisdom preserved in a copy in the library of Ashurbanipal of Assyria which

begins: "If the king gives not judgment according to the law, the people

perish . . . if he gives not judgment according to the law of the land, (the

god) Ea . . . gives his place to another, - if he gives not judgment

according to the statutes, his country suffers invasion." Very suggestive is

another line of the same document. "If he gives not judgment according to

(the desire of) his nobles, his days are long" (IV. Rawlinson, 55). Thus

gods and the king alike are regarded as pledged to the maintenance of

justice. The parties to a contract swear by the god, the king, and the city

that they will keep their agreements. The abundance of this legal material

has led some scholars to the conclusion voiced by Professor Maspero, who

declares that these records "reveal to us a people greedy of gain, exacting,

litigious, and almost exclusively absorbed by material concerns" (Dawn of

Civilization, p. 760). While there may be truth in this verdict, no one can

deny that the spectacle of a people, in these early times, carrying on their

affairs through agreements sanctioned by the state, and settling their

quarrels by process of legal procedure is one which arouses surprise, if not

admiration, and indicates a conception of civic order full of the promise of

progress.

Civilization Of Old Babylonia: Literature, Science, Art, And Religion



78. A People as far advanced in social and political organization as

were the ancient Babylonians could not have failed to make similar progress

in the higher elements of civilization. They were, indeed, pre-eminently a

practical folk, and were guided in all their activities by the material ends

to be gained. Their literary remains will serve as an illustration in

point. Writing, in use among them from the earliest times, was primarily

employed for business purposes, in contracts and other legal documents.

Likewise the very practical conjuration formulae were the most numerous of

the religious texts. The art of writing was confined in great measure to

priestly circles, to scribes taught in the priestly schools and associated

with the temples. Documents of all kinds were written to order by these

scribes, and the signature affixed by pressing the thumb-nail or a seal into

the clay. The difficulty of acquiring the complicated cuneiform script cut

off the majority of the people from ever using it. For teaching it, a

number of text-books were employed which were copied by the students. Some

of the most valuable inscriptional material, like the kings' lists, have

come down to us in these students' copies. In Sippar, an inscription on a

small round tablet has been found, the contents of which suggest that it may

have been an ancient diploma or medal of that famous priestly school. It

reads, "Whosoever has distinguished himself at the place of tablet-writing

shall shine as the light" (Hilprecht, Recent Research, etc., p. 86). The

scribes were, indeed, not only an honorable, but even an indispensable

element of Babylonian society; upon them depended social and political

progress. The large number of letters now in our museums from officials and

private persons, both men and women, shows that communication by means of

writing was widespread, but all letters were probably put into writing by

scribes, and it is to be presumed that scribes were employed to read them to

their recipients. One cannot safely argue from these letters or from the

business documents that ability to read and write belonged to the people at

large.



79. Old Babylonia was, from the earliest historical period, not merely

in possession of a highly conventionalized form of writing, but already had

also begun to produce a literature which embraced no narrow range of

subjects. The chief element in it was religious, consisting of hymns,

psalms, myths, ritual prescripts, and votive inscriptions. Even where

religion is not directly the subject, the documents show its influence.

Thus the astronomical and astrological texts are from priestly circles, and

the epic and descriptive poetry deals with the gods and heroes of mythology.

Reference has already been made to the legal codes and to fragments of

political wisdom, while our knowledge of the history of the age comes from

the various royal inscriptions written on palace walls, cylinders, steles,

and statues. The origin of this literary activity lies back of the

beginning of history. Before the age of Sargon, once thought primitive,

extends a long period from which important royal texts have been preserved.

Sargon, indeed, is thought to have focussed the literary activity of his

time in a series of religious works prepared for his royal library in Agade,

and no doubt every ruler who obtained wider dominion than that over a single

city-state took occasion to foster science and literature. Even Gudea of

Shirpurla, whose political position is uncertain, had long narratives of his

pious acts carved on his statues for the enlightenment and praise of

posterity. Chief among these patrons of learning was the founder of

Babylonian unity, Khammurabi, under whom the previous achievements of

scholars, theologians, and poets were gathered together and edited into

literary works of prime importance. In his time or shortly after, the

cosmogonic narratives, the rituals, the epics, the laws, and the

astronomical works were put into the form in which they are now preserved.



80. The characteristics of all Babylonio-Assyrian literature, as

already enumerated (sect. 34), were stamped upon it in this early period.

The material in stone and clay, upon which alone from the first men wrote,

compelled simplicity of utterance. Religion, the first subject for literary

effort, determined the style and dominated the content of subsequent

literature. Religion is responsible for the stereotyped phraseology and the

repetitiousness approaching monotony, the expressions having become fixed at

an early period and employed in sacred ceremonials at a time when literature

was looked upon as a gift of the gods and set apart for their service. Thus

what at the beginning was a desirable repetition of holy words became at

last the accepted form for all literary utterance. Poetry evidently was the

earliest and most favored medium of literature, for it reached a

comparatively high stage of development. The lyric appears in hymns,

prayers, and psalms for use in the liturgical worship. Narrative poetry is

represented in a variety of fragments which describe the adventures of early

heroes who have dealings with gods and monsters of the primeval world. Even

the culminating achievement of an epic has been reached in the story of

Gilgamesh, preserved in twelve books, a Babylonian Odyssey. This poetry is

not naive in character; already epithets have become conventional; rhythm

pervades it, rising into parallelism, the balancing of expressions in

corresponding lines, phrases, or sentences, which express now antithetic

ideas, now the same idea in different forms. Even metre and strophical

arrangement are regarded by some scholars as discoverable in the hymns and

epic fragments. How far back in the unknown past must be placed the

beginnings of this literary activity which has attained such development in

this early age of Babylonia!



81. The authors of these writings are unknown. A few names have come

down in connection with certain poems, but it is not unlikely that they are

names of scribes who copied, or of priests who recited the epics or the

hymns. The fact is significant, for it indicates that the literature is the

work of a class, not of individuals; that it grew into form under the

shaping of many hands; that what has survived is, in its well-organized

whole, the flower of uncounted generations of priestly activity. The books

were made up of pages, numbered according to the number of tablets required;

each tablet was marked for identification with the opening words of the

book; the tablets were deposited in the temples in chambers prepared with

shelves for the purpose. Editors and commentators were already busy,

arranging and revising the literature of the past. Scholars have concluded

that the narrative of the deluge in the Gilgamesh epic is composed of two

earlier versions joined together by such a reviser. Whether these temple

libraries were open to the public is questionable, and indeed one is not to

conclude from this splendid outburst of early literature that the

Babylonians were therefore a literary people, even as one cannot argue from

the abundance of written business documents that there was a general ability

to read and write. That the production of literary works and interest in

them were confined primarily to the priests, and secondarily to the upper

classes, is, in our present scarcity of information, the safest conclusion.

82. What has already been said will prepare the reader for a judgment

upon the general character of this literature. The material on which it

must needs be written, the early age in which it appears, and the priestly

influence which dominates it are to be taken into account in such an

estimate. It is not just to bring into comparison the literary work of

later peoples, such as the Hebrews or the Greeks; the Egyptian literature of

the same period may more properly be regarded as a competitor. Thus tested,

the Babylonian undoubtedly comes off superior. Its imagery, while sometimes

fantastic, is often bold and strong, sometimes weird, even fresh and

delicate. Its form, particularly in the poetry, is highly developed,

rhythmical, and flowing. Its thought is not seldom profound with the

mysteries of life and death and vigorous in grappling with these problems.

Especially remarkable is the fine talent for narration, as Tiele has

observed in his estimate of the literature (BAG, pp. 572 f). Over against

Maspero's strange dictum that "the bulk of Chaldean literature seems nothing

more than a heap of pretentious trash" (Dawn of Civ., p. 771), may be placed

Sayce's general remark that "even if we judge it from a merely literary

point of view, we shall find much to admire" (Babylonian Literature, p. 70),

and the more detailed conclusion of Baumgartner, particularly as to the

Gilgamesh Epic, that, "regarded purely as poetry, it has a kind of primitive

force, haunting voices that respond to the great problems of human life,

suffering, death, and the future, dramatic vividness of representation and

utterance, a painting of character and a depicting of nature which produce

strong effects with few strokes" (Geschichte der Weltlitteratur, I. p. 84).

The influence which this literature exerted upon other peoples is a proof of

its power. Its mythological conceptions reappear in Hebrew imagery; its

epic figures in Greek religious lore. The dependence of the Hebrew

narratives of the creation and deluge upon the similar Babylonian stories

may be uncertain, but the form of the hymns, their lyrical and rhythmical

structure, has, in all probability, formed the model for Hebrew psalmody,

while many of the expressions of religious feeling and aspiration, first

wrought out in the temples of Babylonia, have entered into the sacred

language of universal religion.



83. The ancient Babylonians had made some important advances in the

direction of scientific knowledge and its application to life. Both the

knowledge and its application, however, were inspired and dominated by

religion, a fact which has its good and evil aspects. No doubt, religion

acted as a powerful stimulus to the entering of the various fields of

knowledge on the part of those best fitted to make discoveries, the priests;

to this fact is due the remarkably early acquisitions of the Babylonians in

these spheres. On the other hand, knowledge sought not for its own sake,

but in the interests of religion, was conceived of under religious forms,

employed primarily for religious purposes, and subordinated to religious

points of view. The notion of the universe, for example, was primarily that

of a region where men and gods dwelt; its compartments were arranged to

provide the proper accommodations for them. The earth was figured as an

inverted basket, or bowl (the mountain of the world), its edges resting on

the great watery deep. On its outer surface dwelt mankind. Within its

crust was the dark abode of the dead. Above, and encompassing it, resting

on the waters, was another hemisphere, the heaven, on the under side of

which moved the sun, moon, and stars; on the outer side was supported

another vast deep, behind which in eternal light dwelt the gods. On the

east and west of heaven were gates through which the sun passed at morning

and night in his movement under the heavenly dome. In a chamber just

outside the eastern gate, the gods met to determine the destinies of the

universe. The movements of the world, the relations of nature to man, were

likewise regarded as the activities of the divine powers in making

revelations to humanity or in bringing their wills to bear on mankind.

Since to know their will and way was indispensable for happiness, the priest

studied the stars and the plants, the winds and the rocks, and interpreted

what he learned in terms of practical religion. Medicine consisted largely

in the repetition of formulae to drive out the demons of disease, a ritual

of exorcism where the manipulations and the doses had little if any hygienic

basis. Yet an ancient book of medical praxis and a list of medicinal herbs

show that some real progress was made in the knowledge of the body and of

actual curative agencies.



84. The high development of mathematical science began in the same

sacred source. The forms and relations of geometry were employed for

purposes of augury. The heavens were mapped out, and the courses of the

heavenly bodies traced to determine the bearing of their movements upon

human destinies. Astrology was born in Babylonia and became the mother of

Astronomy. The world of nature in its various physical manifestations was

studied for revelations of the divine will, and the resulting skill of the

priests in the science of omens was unsurpassed in the ancient world. Yet,

withal, they had worked out a numerical system, compounded of the decimal

and the sexagesimal series. The basis was the "soss," 60; the "ner" was

600; the "sar," 3600. The metrology was accurate and elaborate, and formed

the starting-point of all other systems of antiquity. All measures of

length, area, capacity, and weight were derived from a single standard, the

hand-breadth. The division of the circle into degrees, minutes, and seconds

on the sexagesimal basis (360 Degrees, 60 Minutes, 60 Seconds) hails from

this period and people. The ecliptic was marked off into the twelve

regions, and the signs of the zodiac, as we know them, already designated.

The year of three hundred sixty-five and one-fourth days was known, though

the common year was reckoned according to twelve months of thirty days each,

and equated with the solar year by intercalating a month at the proper

times. Tables of stars and their movements, of eclipses of moon and sun,

were carefully prepared. The year began with the month Nisan (March-April);

the day with the rising of the sun; the month was divided into weeks of

seven days; the day from sunrise to sunrise into twelve double hours of

sixty minutes. The clepsydra and the sun-dial were babylonian inventions

for measuring time.



85. The materials from which are obtained a knowledge of the history of

early Babylonia offer, at the same time, testimony as to the artistic

development, which may be traced, therefore, through the three historic

epochs. In the pre-Sargonic period almost all the available material is

that in stone and metal found at Shirpurla. On a bas-relief of King Ur Nina

he stands with a basket upon his head, his shoulders and bust bare, a skirt

about his waist descending to his feet. Before him his children,

represented as of much smaller stature, express their obeisance by the hands

clasped across the breast. The heads and feet are in profile, while the

bodies are presented full to the spectator, thus producing a contorted

effect. The whole, while full of simplicity and vigor, is crude and rough.

The long sharp noses, retreating foreheads, and large deep-set eyes give a

strange bird-like appearance to the faces. The so-called "vulture stele" of

Edingiranagin (sect. 76) is much more complex in its design. It is a large

piece of white stone carved on both faces. On the one side four scenes in

the war are represented - the battle, the victory, the funeral rites and

thank-offering, the execution of the captives. On the other side, the booty

is heaped up before the gods, and the coat of arms of Shirpurla is held

aloft in the king's hand. The scenes are spiritedly sketched, and artistic

unity is sought in the complicated representation. The silver vase of

Entemena (sect. 56) is the finest piece of metal work of the time. It rises

gracefully from a bronze pedestal, rounds out to one-half its height, and

ends in a wide vertical collar. Its sides are adorned with eagles, goats,

lions, and other animals. The age of Sargon is introduced by the splendid

bas-relief of Naram Sin, found on the upper Tigris. What remains of it is

a fragment only, but it represents a royal figure, bearded, with conical

cap, a tunic thrown over the breast and left shoulder, leaving bare the

right arm, which grasps a weapon. The work is singularly fine and strong

(Hilprecht, OBT, I. ii, pl. xxii). The height of the plastic art of the

time is reached in the statues of Gudea of Shirpurla (sect. 60). They are

of very hard stone, but the artist has neglected no detail. The king is

represented in the attitude of submission before the gods, his hands clasped

upon his breast. The head is gone from every statue, but heads of other

statues have been found which illustrate the method of treatment. A thick

cap or turban is worn on the head, and the tunic, as in the Naram Sin

basrelief, leaves the right arm bare and descends to the feet. Special

study is given to this drapery; the very folds are somewhat timidly

reproduced. In mastery of his material the artist has made much progress

since the early days. The impression given is one of severe simplicity,

directness, attention to detail, and concentrated power (Maspero, DC, pp.

611 ff.).



86. The works just mentioned are the highest achievements of the

sculptor's and goldsmith's art. But, in a variety of smaller objects,

similar artistic skill appears. The alabaster vases, dedicated by the

earliest kings at Nippur, the terra-cotta vases, ornamented with rope

patterns, found in the same place, the copper and bronze statuettes and

vessels of various kinds, (the pottery is, in general, strange to say, rude

and inartistic,) and numerous other implements and objects are testimonies

to the same artistic ability. Particularly are the seal cylinders worthy of

mention. Reference has already been made to the use of the seal by the

Babylonians. Hard pebbles of carnelian, jasper, chalcedony, and porphyry

were rounded into cylinders from two to three fifths of an inch in diameter

and from three-quarters of an inch to an inch and a half in length; then

upon the surface were incised scenes from mythology or figures of holy

beings, such as Gilgamesh in his contest with the lion, or the sun or moon

god receiving homage from his servant. Stamped upon the soft clay of a

document, the seal imparted, as it were, the sanction of the gods to the

agreement as well as certified to the good faith of the signer. The work of

the engraver of these seals is remarkable. The best of them, such as that

of the scribe of Sargon of Agade (Maspero, DC, p. 601; compare B. M. Guide,

pl. xxiii) show extraordinary fineness of workmanship, breadth of treatment,

and realistic fidelity to fact. Indeed, of all the art of early Babylonia

it may be said that it is eminently realistic; the artist has little sense

of the ideal or the general. To present the fact as it is, with simplicity

verging on bareness, and with a directness that is almost too abrupt, - this

was at the same time the weakness and the strength of the Babylonian

sculptor or engraver. This trait is specially evident in his conception of

the gods. He was the first to present them as human beings. But his

anthropomorphism is rude and crude. The divine beings are not greater or

grander than the men who worship them. The conception, indeed, was original

and epoch-making. But it was reserved for the Greeks to improve upon it by

glorifying and idealizing the human forms under which they represented their

Apollo and their Zeus. Another peculiarity which worked to the disadvantage

of Babylonian art was the convention which demanded drapery in the

representation of the human form. Here too is realism, for the changeable

climate doubtless required men to wear thicker clothing, and that more

constantly, than, for example, in Egypt. Hence the study of the nude body

and the sense of beauty and grace which it develops were absent. The long

robes give a stiffness and sameness to the figures for which the greater

skill attained in the representation of drapery hardly compensated.



87. Although the early Babylonians had little stone or wood with which

to build, they used clay bricks with architectural originality and

effectiveness. The palace or temple was not built upon the level of the

ground, but upon a rectangular brick platform. At Shirpurla this was forty

feet high; at Nippur forty-five feet above the plain. Upon it stood the

palace structure of brick, one story high, with its corners usually facing

the cardinal points. The walls were very thick, the chambers small and

dark, the passages narrow and often vaulted. Vertical walls and flat roofs

were the rule. The rooms, courts, galleries, and passages stretched away

interminably, yet with a definite plan, within the rectangle. Huge

buttresses of brick sustained the platform, and pilasters supported the

walls of the structure built upon it. Access to the building was obtained

by a staircase rising from the plain. To protect all from the tremendous

rains which would tend to undermine the walls, the solid mass of the

platform was threaded by terra-cotta drains which carried the water down to

the plain. Ventilating shafts, likewise, were used to let in the air and

drain off the moisture. The temple was sometimes, like the palace, a series

of one-story buildings, but usually culminated in what was a type of temple

construction peculiar to Babylonia, the ziggurat, a series of solid masses

of brick, placed one above the other, each successive story smaller than the

one beneath it. A staircase or an inclined plane led from the shelf of one

story to the next; shrines were placed on the shelves or hollowed out of the

brick; the shrine of the chief deity was at the top. At Nippur the earliest

ziggurat upon the massive temple platform, built by Ur-Gur, was a

rectangular oblong, about one hundred and seventy-five feet by one hundred,

and composed of three stages resting one upon the other (Peters, Nippur, II.

p. 124). The massiveness and monotony of these structures were relieved by

the use of stucco to cover and protect the bricks both without and within.

Conical nails of colored terra-cotta were embedded in this stucco, or

decorative designs were painted upon it. Enamelled bricks likewise were

employed for exterior coatings of walls. For supports of the roofs tree

trunks were used, which were covered with metal sheathing. Thus Babylonia

became the birthplace of the decorated wall and the slender column (Sayce,

Babylonia and Assyria, p. 9). The earliest known keyed arch has been

unearthed at Nippur. The doors of the palaces were hung in huge blocks of

stone hollowed out in the centre to receive the door-posts, almost the only

use of stone found in these buildings. Remembering the material at the

disposal of these architects, one cannot but admire the originality and

utility of the designs wrought out by them. They made up for lack of stone

by the heaping together of great masses of brick. The elevation of the

buildings and the thickness of the walls served, at the same time, to make

the effect more imposing, to supply a surer defence against enemies, and to

afford protection from heat and storms.



88. It has frequently been noted hitherto how the life of the ancient

Babylonian was deeply interfused with his religion. The priests are judges,

scribes, and authors. Writing is first employed in the service of the gods.

Both the themes and the forms of literature are inspired by religion. Art

receives its stimulus from the same source, the royal statues standing as

votive offerings in the temples and the seal cylinders being engraved with

figures of divine beings. Science, whether it be medicine or mathematics,

has, as its ground, the activity of the heavenly powers, or, as its end, the

enlarging of religious knowledge. Therefore it is fitting to close this

review of early Babylonian civilization with a sketch of the religion.

Already the fact has been observed that, from the beginning, the city-states

possessed temples, each the centre of the worship of a particular god (sect.

48). Thus at Eridu was Ea; at Ur, Sin, the moon god; at Larsam, Shamash,

the sun god; at Uruk, the goddess Ishtar; at Shirpurla, Ningirsu; at Nippur,

Enlil or Bel; at Kutha, Nergal; at Sippar, Shamash; at Agade, the goddess

Anunit; at Babylon, Marduk; and at Borsippa, Nabu. From this list of gods

it is evident at first glance that religion was local and that the gods were

in some cases powers of nature. Clearly a more than primitive stage of

development had been reached, since the same god was worshipped in two

different cities. Investigation has made these facts more certain by

showing that Ningirsu, Nergal, and Marduk are, probably, forms of the sun

god; that Anunit is but another name for Ishtar; that Enlil was a storm god;

that at each of these cities a multitude of minor deities was worshipped;

and that similar local worship was carried on at less known centres of

population. The religious inscriptions of Gudea of Shirpurla (sect. 60)

show a well-organized pantheon consisting of a variety of male and female

deities with Ningirsu in the lead. Here appears the god Anu, "the heaven,"

who, though not prominent in local worship, stands theoretically at the head

of all the gods. The religion of early Babylonian history, then, was a

local nature worship which was passing into a more or less formal

organization and unification of deities as a result of political development

or theological formulation.



89. Behind this advanced stage was another and very different phase of

Babylonian religion testified to by a body of conjuration formulae and hymns

of similar tenor. In the great mass of this literature the names of the

gods just enumerated are hardly mentioned. The world is peopled with

spirits, Zi, good and evil beings, whose relations to man determine his

condition and destiny. If he suffers from sickness, it is an attack of a

demon who must be driven out by a formula, or by an appeal to a stronger

spirit of good. These powers are summed up under various names indicative

of the beginnings of organization, as, for example, "spirit of heaven" (zi

ana), "spirit of earth" (zi kia); "lord of demons" (en lil); "lord of earth"

(en ki). As the sense of good, of beneficent, powers got the better of the

fear of harm and ruin in the minds of men, the spirit-powers passed into

gods. Thus the "spirit of heaven" became Anu; the "lord of earth" or the

"spirit of earth" was identified with Ea of Eridu; the "lord of demons" was

found again in Bel of Nippur. A first triad of Babylonian gods was thus

constituted in Anu, Bel, and Ea. As religion grew in firmness of outline

and organization, the hosts of spirits retreated before the great gods, and,

while not disappearing, took a subordinate place, in private or individual

worship, and continued to exercise an important influence upon the faith and

practice of the people. The divine beings, whether rising out of local

spirits or spirits of nature or the combination of both, took the field and

marked the transition to the new phase of religion in which the beneficent

powers were recognized as the superior beings, and received the worship and

gifts of the community.



90. The general notion of divine beings entertained by the old

Babylonian is illustrated by the term for god, ilu, which conveys the root

idea of power, might. It was as "strong" ones that the spirits came into

contact with man from the beginning. It was the heavenly powers of sun and

moon and stars and storm that of all nature-forces had most impressed him.

He indicated his attitude toward them also by the favorite descriptive term

"lord" (en, bel). They were above him, supreme powers whom he served and

obeyed in humility and dependence. Yet mighty as were the gods, and exalted

as they were above humanity, the Babylonian was profoundly conscious of the

influences brought to bear by the divine world upon mankind. From the

period when he felt himself surrounded by manifold spirits of the natural

world, to the time when he sought to do the will of the great heavenly

powers, he was ever the centre of the play of the forces of the other world.

They were never far from him in purpose and action. The stars moving over

the sky spoke to him of their will and emitted divine influences; the wind,

the storm, the earthquake, the eclipse, the actions of animals, the flight

of birds, - all conveyed the divine messages to him who could interpret

them. Hence arose the immense mass of magical texts, the pseudo-science of

astrology, and the doctrine of omens. The religious temper produced by such

an idea of god was twofold. On the one hand the divine influence was felt

as pure power, arbitrary, undefined, and not to be counted on; hence to be

averted at all hazards, restrained by magical means, or rendered favorable

by an elaborate ritual. Or, the worshipper felt in the divine presence a

sense of ill-desert, and, in his desire for harmony with the divine ruler,

flung himself in confession and appeal upon the mercy of his god in those

remarkable Penitential Psalms in which fear, suffering, and a sense of guilt

are so joined together as almost to defy analysis and to forbid a final

judgment as to the essence of the ethical quality. Those who first felt the

emotions which these psalms reveal were certainly on the road leading to the

heights of moral aspiration and renewal. The difficulty was that the

element of physical power in the gods was ineradicable and, corresponding to

it, the use of magic to constrain the divine beings crept into all religious

activity and endeavor, thus thwarting all moral progress. Though men

recognized that their world had been won from chaos to cosmos by the gods

under whose authority they lived, - for this was the meaning of the victory

of Marduk over Tiamat, - they conceived of the victory in terms of the

natural physical universe, not as a conquest of sin by the power of holiness

and truth.



91. The conduct of worship was no doubt originally the task of the

priest. He afterward became king, and carried with him into his royal

position many of the prerogatives and the restrictions attending the

priestly office. He was the representative of the community before the

gods, and therefore girt about with sanctity which often involved strict

tabu. But he soon divided his powers with others, priests strictly so

called, who performed the various duties connected with the priestly service

and whose names and offices have in part come down to us. Rituals have been

preserved for various parts of the service; many hymns have survived which

were sung or recited. Sacrifices of animals were made, libations poured

out, and incense burned. Priests wore special dresses, ablutions were

strongly insisted upon, clean and unclean animals were carefully

distinguished, special festivals were kept in harmony with the changes of

the seasons and the movements of the heavenly bodies. Religious

processions, in which the gods were carried about in arks, ships, or chests,

were common. A calendar of lucky and unlucky days was made. A Sabbath was

observed for the purpose of assuaging the wrath of the gods, that their

hearts might rest (Jastrow, in Am. Jour. of Theol., II. p. 315 f.). Every

indication points to the existence of a powerful priesthood whose influence

was felt in all spheres of social and national life.



92. The outlook of the Babylonians upon the life beyond was sombre.

Burial customs indicate that they believed in future existence, since drink

and food were placed with the dead in their graves. But, in harmony with

the severer conception of God, the Babylonian thought of the future had an

uncertain and forbidding aspect. The poem which describes the descent of

the goddess Ishtar to the abode of the dead, called Arallu, conceives of

this region as dark and dusty, where the shades flit about like birds in

spaces shut in by bars, whence there is no egress. There is the realm of

Nergal, and of queen Allat who resents the presence of Ishtar, goddess of

life and love, and inflicts dire punishments upon her. Yet in this prison-

house there is a fountain of life, though sealed with seven seals; and in

the Epic of Gilgamesh are heroes who have reached the home of the blessed, -

indications that the higher religious aspiration was seeking after a

conception of the future more in harmony with the belief in great and

beneficent deities dwelling in the light and peace of the upper heaven. It

was the darker view, however, that passed from Babylonia to the west and

reappeared in the dusky Sheol of the Hebrews, into which all, whether good

or bad, descended, there to prolong a sad and shadowy existence.



93. In concluding this presentation of early Babylonian life it is

possible to sum up the dominant forces of history and progress under three

heads: (1) Religion is the inspiring and regulative element of the

community. In its representatives government finds its first officials. In

the centre of each city is the temple with its ruling and protecting deity.

Political growth is indicated by the wider worship of the local god. The

citizens and their lords are servants of the god. He is the fount of

justice, and his priests are guardians of culture. Industry and commerce

have their sanctions in the oaths of the gods, and the temples themselves

are centres of mercantile activity; they are the banks, the granaries, and

the seats of exchange. All life is founded on religion and permeated by its

influence. (2) The energizing element of these communities is the ruler.

Already the power of personality has made itself felt. Political

organization has crystallized about the individual. He exercises supreme

and unlimited power, as servant of the deity and representative of divine

authority. He is the builder, the general, the judge, the high priest. All

the affairs of his people are an object of solicitude to him. His name is

perpetuated upon the building-stones of the temple and the palace. His

figure is preserved in the image which stands before the god in his temple.

He is sometimes, in literal truth, the life of his people. (3) From these

two forces united, religion and the ruler, springs the third element, the

impulse to expansion. Neither god nor king is satisfied with local

sovereignty. The ambition of the one is sanctified and stimulated by the

divine commendation, encouragement, and effectual aid of the other. The god

claims universal sway. The king, his representative, goes forth to conquer

under his command. The people follow their human and their divine lords

whithersoever they lead. In that period circumstances were also

particularly favorable to such forward movements. Communication between the

different cities was made easy by the innumerable watercourses threading the

plain. The mighty rivers offered themselves as avenues for wider expansion.

Such was Old Babylonia in its essential characteristics. Such was the

philosophy of its early history, illustrated by the details of the struggles

which have already been described (Part I. chap. II.). The end was a united

Babylonia, achieved by the great king Khammurabi, in whom all these forces

culminated.

Times Of Khammurabi Of Babylon. 2300-2100 B.C.



94. It is clear that the city of Babylon did not play a prominent part

in early Babylonian history (sect. 50). It was not, like Agade, Shirpurla,

Uruk