RECORDS OF THE PAST

New Series

_______________

BEING
ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS
OF THE
ANCIENT MONUMENTS OF EGYPT AND
WESTERN ASIA

EDITED BY A. H. SAYCE

VOLUME ONE

___________________

CONTENTS

{p.v}

PREFACE

THE  favourable reception accorded to the first series of Records of the Past, and the hope more than once expressed since its discontinuance that a similar series would be again started, have led to this second attempt to lay before the public some of the most important documents left us by the civilised nations of the ancient Oriental world. During the ten years that have elapsed since the first series was concluded, Assyrian research may be said to have entered upon a new phase. Expeditions have returned from Babylonia, bringing with them the spoils of ancient libraries, the clay tablets preserved in the British Museum and elsewhere have been copied and examined with increased industry and exactness, and students have been flocking to the new study in Germany and America. The decipherment of the cuneiform inscriptions of Van has opened up a fresh world of language and history, and the geography of Western Asia in the Assyrian epoch has been mapped out in almost all its essential details.

The increase of materials, and more especially of  {p.vi} labourers in the field of research, has made our knowledge of the Assyrian lexicon at once wider and more accurate. Inscriptions which were still obscure ten years ago can now be read with a fair approach to exactness, while many of the translations proposed in the former series of the Records can be amended in many respects. Indeed there are certain cases in which the progress of knowledge has shown the tentative renderings of a few years ago to be so faulty, if not misleading, that it has been determined to replace them by revised translations in the series which is now being issued.

The new series will, it is hoped, be found to be an improvement upon its predecessor in certain points. The translations will be provided with fuller introductions and notes, bearing more particularly upon the history, geography, and theology of the texts, and drawing attention to the illustrations they afford of the Scriptures of the Old Testament. The historical inscriptions, moreover, will be published, so far as is possible, in chronological order.

In one point, however, a difference will be noticed between the plan of this second series of Records and that of the first. The value of a translation from a language known only to a few scholars depends in large measure upon the confidence with which its precise wording can be accepted. The writer who wishes to make use of a translation from an Egyptian or Assyrian text for historical or controversial purposes ought to know where it is certain, and {p.vii} where it is only possible, or at most probable. He ought to receive warning of passages or words or readings of doubtful character, and the translator ought to provide proofs of any new renderings he may give. In the present series of volumes, accordingly, doubtful words and expressions will be followed by a note of interrogation, the preceding word being put into italics where necessary : other wise italics will be used only for the transliteration of proper names or words which cannot at present be translated. The notes will contain a justification of new translations, whether of words hitherto undeciphered or of words to which a different signification has hitherto been attached. The names of individuals will be distinguished from those of deities or localities by being printed in Roman type, whereas the names of deities and localities will be in capitals. Though exploration and discovery have been carried on actively in Egypt during the last decade, thanks mainly to the Egypt Exploration Fund and the enterprise of Professor Maspero, the results have not been so startling or numerous as those which have attended the progress of the younger study of Assyriology. There is not the same reason for amending the translations, previously published, of Egyptian documents, nor has any large number of historical texts been brought to light. Instead, there fore, of publishing alternately translations from the Assyrian and Egyptian monuments, Assyrian and Egyptian texts will appear in the same volume, {p.viii} though it will doubtless happen that the Assyrian element will preponderate in some volumes, the Egyptian element in others. Egyptian and Assyrian, of course, will not be exclusively represented; Phoenicians and Proto-Armenians have left us written monuments; comparatively few though they may be, and the Records of the Past would be incomplete without such important inscriptions as that of the Moabite king Mesha or of the Hebrew Pool of Siloam.

In commending the first volume of this new series of Records to the approval of the public, the Editor must not forget to say that the enterprise is international, eminent scholars belonging to all nationalities having consented to take part in it, and that if his name appears somewhat too frequently in the present volume, it is a fault which shall not occur again.

A. H. SAYCE

QUEEN S COLLEGE, OXFORD,
2nd August 1888.

EQUIVALENTS OF THE HEBREW LETTERS IN THE TRANSLITERATION OF ASSYRIAN NAMES
MENTIONED IN THESE VOLUMES

N.B. Those Assyriologists who transcribe ש by sh use s for ס. The Assyrian e represents a diphthong as well as ע.

In the Introductions and Notes W. A. I. denotes The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, in five volumes, published by the Trustees of the British Museum.

THE ASSYRIAN CALENDAR

{p.1}

THE DYNASTIC TABLETS AND CHRONICLES OF THE BABYLONIANS
BY THE EDITOR

CHRONOLOGY is the skeleton of history, and until we can find the correct chronological place for a historical monument it loses a large part of its value. Thanks to the lists of the so-called eponyms, by means of whom the Assyrians dated their years, the chronology of the Assyrian kings has long since been placed upon a satisfactory footing as far back as the tenth century before our era. The dates, moreover, assigned by Sennacherib to Tiglath-Pileser I (BC 1106), and Tukulti-Uras, the son of Shalmaneser I (BC 1290), as well as the lengthy genealogies with which these kings are connected, enable us to extend Assyrian chronology back for another five hundred years, though, of course, with only approximate accuracy.

While our knowledge of Assyrian chronology, however, has thus been tolerably fixed for a long time past, we have had to depend upon the vague and contradictory statements of Greek writers for {p.2} our knowledge of the chronology of the older king dom of Babylonia. Apart from the invaluable table of kings known as Ptolemy s Canon, which belongs to the later period of Babylonian history, and the unsatisfactory list of dynasties excerpted from an epitomist of Berossos, our only monumental authorities for Babylonian chronology were the Assyrian inscriptions themselves, together with a few fragments of a dynastic tablet brought to light by Mr. George Smith and the so-called Synchronous History of Assyria and Babylonia, of which I published a translation in the former series of Records of the Past (vol. iii.) This "Synchronous History" was composed by an Assyrian scribe, and consists of brief notices of the occasions on which the kings of the two countries had entered into relation, hostile or otherwise, with one another. Since my translation was published in 1874, another large fragment of the tablet has been discovered, and accordingly I purpose giving a new translation of the whole document in a future volume of the present series. The "Synchronous History" gives no dates, and consequently its chronological value depends upon our knowledge of the respective dates to which the Assyrian monarchs mentioned in it belong.

Within the last few years a number of discoveries due to Mr. Pinches has entirely changed our position in regard to the chronology of the Babylonian kings. As I have already stated, Mr. Smith found among the tablets brought from the royal library of Nineveh {p.3} a small fragment which, as he perceived, contained the names and regnal years of the kings of Babylonia, arranged in dynasties. The work to which it belonged must accordingly have been similar to that from which Berossos derived his dynastic list of Chaldean monarchs. Mr. Smith published the fragment, with a translation and commentary, in the Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, iii. 2 (1874). It is written on both sides, and the tablet once consisted of six columns, each containing about seventy lines. I will call it the "Third Dynastic Tablet."

The next discovery was made by Mr. Pinches six years later among the inscriptions brought from the site of Babylon by the overseer of Mr. Hormuzd Rassam. He found among them a small tablet of unbaked clay, quite complete and inscribed on both sides. It contains the names of the kings belonging to two early dynasties, the number of years reigned by each king being added to the names in the case of the first dynasty. The tablet seems to be a sort of schoolboy s exercise, having been copied from some larger work in order to be committed to memory. The Reverse has been published by Mr. Pinches in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 7th December 1880, and I will call it the "First Dynastic Tablet."

Another and more important document the "Second Dynastic Tablet " was published by Mr. Pinches, with a translation and explanation, in the {p.4} Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 6th May 1884. This is also a tablet of unbaked clay from Babylonia, and it contains a list of the Babylonian sovereigns, arranged in dynasties, from the first dynasty which made the city of Babylon the capital down to the period of the Persian conquest. The number of regnal years is added to the name of each king and the length of time each dynasty lasted is duly recorded. The names of some of the kings are written in an abbreviated form: this is especially the case with those belonging to the second dynasty.

The list, it will be observed, is confined to the dynasties which reigned in Babylon itself. No notice is taken of the kings and dynasties who ruled in "Accad and Sumer" before Babylon became the capital of the empire. The lost columns of the "Third Dynastic Tablet" show how numerous they were, and the fact is borne out by the bricks and other monuments of early Chaldean monarchs whose names do not occur among the successors of Sumu-abi. Most of the kings, indeed, whose names are known to us in connection with the temples they built or restored belonged to older dynasties than those which had their seat in the city of Babylon.

A considerable number of their names is to be found in another tablet brought by Mr. Rassam from Assyria, and published by Mr. Pinches in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 11th January 1881. A small portion of it had already been published in W. A. I., ii. 65, and had given rise {p.5} to a good many false conclusions. The object of this tablet was philological and not chronological; in fact the writer expressly states that the names of the kings were "not written according to their chronological order." He merely wished to furnish the Semitic or Assyro-Babylonian translations of the Accado-Sumerian and Kassite names borne by so many of the early princes, and in some cases of the mode in which the names of Semitic kings were pronounced or written by their Accadian subjects.

Among the latter is the name of Sargon of Accad, the ancient hero of the Semitic population of Chaldea, who founded the first Semitic empire in the country and established a great library in his capital city of Agade or Accad near Sippara. The seal of his librarian, Ibni-sarru, of very beautiful workmanship, is now in Paris, and has been published by M. de Clercq (Collection de Clercq, pi. 5, No. 46), while a copy of his annals, together with those of his son Naram-Sin, is to be found in W. A. I., iv. 34. His date has been fixed by a passage in a cylinder of Nabonidos discovered in the ruins of the temple of the Sun-god at Sippara, and published in W. A. I., v. 64. The antiquarian zeal of Nabonidos led him to excavate among the foundations of the temple in the hope of finding the cylinder of Naram-Sin, who was known to have been the founder of it, and he tells us (col. ii. 56 seg.):

"I sought for its old foundation-stone, and eighteen cubits deep {p.6} I dug into the ground, and the foundation-stone of Naram-Sin, the son of Sargon, which for 3200 years no king who had gone before me had seen, the Sun-god, the great lord of E-Babara, the temple of the seat of the goodness of his heart, let me see, even me."

In the opinion, therefore, of Nabonidos, a king who had a passion for investigating the past records of his country, Naram-Sin reigned 3200 years before his own time, that is to say, about BC 3700.

Before the rise of the Semitic kingdom of Sargon of Accad, lies that earlier Accado-Sumerian period when Babylonia was still in the hands of a people who spoke an agglutinative language, such as those of the modern Turks or Finns, and had originated the cuneiform system of writing and the primitive civilisation of the Chaldean cities. Relics of this ancient period have been discovered by M. de Sarzec in the mounds of Telloh, and the Sumerian inscriptions which they bear are now being de ciphered by French scholars, more especially by M. Amiaud. M. Amiaud has been good enough to introduce the historical documents of Babylonia and Assyria to the readers of the present series of Records of the Past, by his translations of these oldest memorials of human life and thought in the valley of the Euphrates. If Sargon of Accad lived about BC 3800, the kings of Telloh must have flourished as far back as the fourth millennium before our era.

{p.7}

The last chronological document brought to light during the last few years is in many respects the most important of all. This is what has been termed "The Babylonian Chronicle" by its discoverer, Mr. Pinches, who gave an abstract of it in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 6th May 1884. Since then, the text has been published with a translation and commentary by Dr. Winckler in the Zeitschtrift fur Assyriologie, ii. 2, 3 (1887); it has also been translated by Dr. Oppert. The tablet (which is marked 84. 2-1 i, 356) was brought from Babylonia and is inscribed on both sides with four columns of text. It was a copy or compilation made by a Babylonian in the reign of Darius from older records, and must have been similar to the document from which Ptolemy's Canon of Babylonian kings was extracted. Like the latter it starts from the era of Nabonassar, BC 747.

The chronicle is written from a Babylonian point of view, and must therefore be checked by contemporaneous Assyrian inscriptions. What they describe as Assyrian successes are sometimes passed over altogether or represented as Babylonian victories. The Assyrian kings Tiglath-Pileser III and Shalmaneser IV are not acknowledged under the names they had adopted from two of the most illustrious monarchs of the first Assyrian empire, but under their original names of Pul and Ulula; Sargon, on the other hand, whose name was that of {p.8} the favourite hero of Babylonian legend, is known by the same name in the Chronicle as he is on the monuments of Assyria. At the same time the Chronicle helps us in correcting the inaccuracies of the Assyrian accounts, where, for example, Suzub represents both Nergal-yusezib and Musezib-Merodach. In fact, it confirms the judgment, already expressed by Assyriologists, that Sennacherib is the least trustworthy of the royal historians of Assyria.

We are at present ignorant of the precise way in which the Babylonians reckoned their chronology. In Assyria the years were named after certain officers, ordinarily known as eponyms, who were changed each year, and as most of the institutions of Assyria were derived from Babylonia it is very probable that the system of counting time by the names of the eponyms was also of Babylonian invention. How far we can trust the dates assigned to the kings of the earlier dynasties is open to question. The length of reign assigned to the kings of the dynasties of the sea and of Bit-Bazi in the Second and Third Dynastic Tablets do not agree, while the number of regnal years given to the several kings of the first dynasty of Babylon hot only plays on the same ciphers but is suspiciously long. On the other hand, the contract tablets be longing to the time of Khammuragas imply that his reign was not a short one.

There is evidence in a later part of the dynastic lists that at least one name has been omitted. Dr. Winckler has published (in the Zeitschrift fur As- {p.9} syriologie, ii. 3) the commencement of an inscription from Babylonia (marked 83.1-18) belonging to a certain king of Babylon, who calls himself Kuri-galzu the son of Kara-Urus. Dr. Winckler shows that this must be Kuri-galzu II, and that his name ought to occur in the list between those of Kara-Urus and Rimmon-nadin-suma. It is quite possible that other reigns have fallen out in other parts of the lists.

The lacuna in the Second Dynastic Tablet between the beginning of the eighth dynasty and the commencement of the reign of Nabonassar unfortunately prevents us from determining with certainty the date assigned by the compiler of it to Sumu-abi. But there are two synchronisms between Babylonian and Assyrian history which may serve to remedy the defect. According to Sennacherib, Meroclach-nadin-akhe defeated Tiglath-Pileser I, 418 years before his own conquest of Babylon, that is to say, in BC 1106, while the "Synchronous History" makes Assur-bil-kala, the son of Tiglath-Pileser I, the contemporary of Merodach-sapik-kullat, and Assur-dan the great-grandfather of Tiglath-Pileser I, the contemporary of Zamama-nadin-suma, the father of Assur-dan being contemporaneous with Rimmon-[suma-natsir?]. If Merodach-nadin-akhe is the ninth king of the dynasty of Isin, the date of Zamama-nadin- suma will be BC 1160, agreeing very well with the period to which the end of the reign of Assur-dan should be assigned. In this case Sagasalti-buryas, who flourished 800 years before Nabonidos, will not {p.10} be identical with the Saga-sal[tiyas] of the dynastic list. The reign of Khammuragas will have commenced BC 2282, the first dynasty of Babylon establishing its power there in BC 2394.

We learn from the inscriptions of Khammuragas that he was the first of his dynasty to rule over the whole of Babylonia. A rival dynasty had previously reigned at Karrak in the south, while the Elamites had invaded portions of the country and probably held them in subjection. Assur-bani-pal states that the Elamite king Kudur-Nankhundi had carried away the image of the goddess Nana from Babylonia 1635 years before his own time, or about BC 2285, and contract- tablets refer to the conquest of "the lord of Elam and King Rim-Agu" of Karrak by Khammuragas. A large number of contract-tablets, indeed, belong not only to the reigns of Khammu ragas and his son Samsu-iluna, but also to the reign of Rim-Agu, who seems to have been master of the greater part of Chaldaea before his overthrow by the king of Babylon. George Smith was probably right in identifying him with the son of the Elamite prince Kudur-Mabug, who ruled at Larsa and claimed the imperial title of "king of Sumer and Accad."

The rise of the empire of Khammuragas brought with it a revival of learning and literature such as had marked the rise of the empire of Sargon. The calendar appears to have been reformed at this period, and the great native work on astronomy and astrology put into the shape in which it has come {p.11} down to us. The reign thus formed an era some what similar to that of Nabonassar, and it is therefore curious to see how closely the date I have assigned to it corresponds with that arrived at by von Gutschmidt from classical sources for the beginning of the Babylonian epoch. If the Latin translation can be trusted (Simplicius ad Arist. dc Coelo, 503 A), the astronomical observations sent by Kallisthcnes from Babylon to Aristotle in BC 331 reached back for 1903 years (i.e. to BC 2234). Berossos the Chaldean historian, according to Pliny (N. H. vii. 57), stated that these observations commenced at Babylon 490 years before the Greek era of Phoroneus, and consequently in BC 2243. According to Stephanos of Byzantium, Babylon was built 1002 years before the date (given by Hellanikos) for the siege of Troy (BC 1229), which would bring us to BC 2231, while Ktesias, according to George Syncellus, made the reign of Belos or Bel-Merodach last for fifty-five years from BC 2286 to 2231. The fifty-five years of Belos agree with the fifty-five of Khammuragas.

I add here the Canon of Babylonian kings given by Ptolemy in the Almagest.

______
1 Yougaios, if it is not due to a corruption of the text, may represent the name of Yagina, the father of Merodach-baladan.

{p.12}

________
1 Filled up according to Alexander Polyhistor by the brother of Sennacherib, by Hagisa or Akises for thirty days, and by Merodach-baladan for six months.
2 Called Elibos by Alexander Polyhistor.
3 Assordanios according to Alexander Polyhistor.
4 Josephus (from Berossos) here inserts Laborosoarkhodos, the infant son of Neriglissor, for three months.

{p.13}

No. 1. TRANSLATION OF THE FIRST DYNASTIC TABLET FROM BABYLON

OBVERSE

1. Sumu-abi, the king: 15 years.
2. Sumu-la-ilu, the son of the same: 35 years.
3. Zabu, the son of the same: 14 years.
4. Abil-Sin, the son of the same: 18 years.
5. Sin-muballidh, the son of the same: 30 years.
6. Khammu-ragas,¹ the son of the same: 55 years.
7. Sam su-iluna,² the son of the same: 35 years.
8. Ebisum,³ the son of the same: 25 years.
9. Ammi-satana, the son of the same: 25 years.
10. Ammi-sadugga,⁴ the son of the same: 21 years.
11. Sam su-satana (?), the son of the same: 31 years.
12. 11 kings of the dynasty of BABYLON.

REVERSE

1. (The dynasty of) URU-AZAGGA.⁵ Anman the king.
2. KI-[AN] Nigas.⁶
3. Damki-ili-su.⁷
________
1 The first five names of the dynasty are Semitic. Khammuragas is Kassite or Kossasan, and is interpreted "of a large family." Sinmuballidh may have married a foreign wife.
2 "The Sun-god (is) our god," another Semitic name.
3 "The doer," also Semitic.
4 Kassite, interpreted "the family is established."
5 Uru-azagga is now represented by a part of the mounds of Telloh (the ancient Sirpurla) or its immediate vicinity.
6 Nigas was an Elamite word.
7 Semitic, signifying "gracious is his god."

{p.14}

4. Is-ki-pal.¹
5. Sussi.²
6. Gul-ki-sar.³
7. Kirgal-dara-mas, the son of the same.
8. A-dara-kalama, the son of the same.⁴
9. A-kur-du-ana.⁵
10. Melam-kurkura.⁶
11. Ea-ga(mil?).⁷
12. 1[1] kings of the dynasty of URU-AZAGGA.
________
1 Perhaps to be read in Semitic Sapin-mat-nukurti, "the sweeper away of the land of the foe." The name seems to have been a title.
2 Perhaps the Semitic sitssu, "sixty."
3 In Semitic Muabbid-kissati, "the destroyer of hosts."
4 Apparently, therefore, the son of the preceding king.
5 Rendered by the Semitic Abil-Bel-u sum-same, "the son of Bel (the lord) of the treasury of heaven."
6 "The glory of the world."
7 The last character is partially destroyed. If my restoration is correct, the name would be Semitic and signify "Ea has rewarded."

{p.15}

No. 2. TRANSLATION OF THE SECOND DYNASTIC TABLET FROM BABYLON

COLUMN 1

The first eleven lines are destroyed.

12. 11 kings [of the dynasty of BABYLON] for [294 years].
13. Anma[n] for [5]¹ (years).
14. K1-AN [Nigas] for 55 (years).
15. Damki-ili[su] for 46 x (years).
16. Is-ki-[pal] for 15 (years).
17. Sussi, (his) brother, for 27 (years).
18. Gul-ki-[sar] for 55 (years).
19. Kirgal-[dara-mas] for 50 (years).
20. A-dara-[kalama] for 28 (years).
21. A-kur-du-[ana] for 26 (years).
22. Melamma-[kurkura] for 6 (years).
23. Bel-ga[mil?] for 9 (years).
24. For 368 (years) the n kings of the dynasty of URU-AZAGGA.
25. Gandis for 16 (years).
26. Agum-si[pak] his son for 22 (years).
27. Guya-si[pak] for 22 (years).²
28. Ussi his son for 8 (years).
29. Adu-medas for ... (years).
30. Tazzi-gurumas for ... (years).
_________
1 Mr. Pinches copy gives 36 years.
2 Is this king merely a duplicate of his predecessor, the different spelling of the name having caused the annalist to divide one king into two?

{p.16}

31. [Agum-kak-rimi¹ for ... years],

The next line of this column and the first thirteen lines of the next are destroyed.

COLUMN II

14. for 22 (years).
15. for 26 (years).
16. for 17 (years).
17. Kara ..... for 2 (years).
18. Gis-amme ... ti for 6 (years).
19. Saga-sal [tiyas]² for 13 (years).
20. Kasbat his son for 8 (years).
21. Bel-nadin-sumi for 1 year (and) 6 months.
22. Kara-Urus³ for 1 year (and) 6 months.
23. Rimmon-nadin-suma for 6 (years).
24. Rimmon-suma-natsir for 30 (years).
25. Meli-Sipak⁴ for 15 (years).
26. Merodach-abla-iddin (Merodach-baladan) his son for 13 (years).
27. Zamama-nadin-sumi⁵ for 1 (year).
28. Bel-suma .... ⁶ for 3 (years).
29. For 576 (years) 9 months the 36 kings [of the dynasty of the KASSITES].⁷
30. Merodach- .... for 17 (years).
________
1 Supplied from an inscription of the king himself, who styles himself the son of Tassi-gurumas, the descendant of Abi ..... the son of Agum .... and the offspring of the god Suqamuna.
2 Identified by Dr. Oppert with Kudur-Bel, who, according to Nabonidos, was the father of Sagasalti-buryas, the latter of whom reigned 800 years before himself (BC 1340). But the identification is doubtful, since the names do not agree.
3 "The servant of Bel" (Kudur-Bel) in Kassite.
4 "The man of Merodach" in Kassite.
5 Zamama-nadin-sumi was a contemporary of the Assyrian king Assur-dan-an (whose name should probably be read Assur-dan, and be identified with that of Assur-dayan, the great-grandfather of Tiglath-Pileser I.)
6 Or Bel-nadin- ....
7 The Kassites were a rude tribe of the Elamite mountains on the north east side of Babylonia. Noldeke has shown that they must be identified with the Kossceans of classical geography.

{p.17}

31. for 6 (years).

The next line of this column and the first four of the next are destroyed.

COLUMN III

5. for 22 (years).
6. Merodach-nadin- ... ¹ for i year and 6 months.
7. Merodach-kul[lat] ... ² for 13 (years).
8. Nebo-nadin- ... for 9 (years).
9. For 72 (years and) 6 months the 11 kings of the dynasty of ISIN.³
10. Simmas-si[pak] for 18 (years).
11. Bel-mukin-[ziri] for 5 months.
12. Kassii-nadin-akhi for 3 (years).
13. For 21 (years and) 5 months the three kings of the dynasty of the land of the Sea.⁴
14. E-ulbar-sakin-sumi for 17 (years).
15. Uras-kudurri-[utsur] for 3 (years).
16. Silanim (?)-Suqamu[na] for 3 months.
17. For 20 (years and) 3 months the 3 kings of the dynasty of BIT-[BAZI].
18. AN .... [an ELAMITE] for 6 (years).
19. for 13 (years).
________
1 Perhaps Merodach-nadin-akhi, the antagonist of the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser I, 418 years before the conquest of Babylon by Sennacherib, and consequently BC 1106.
2 Perhaps the Merodach-sapik-kullat of the Synchronous Tablet, who was a contemporary of Assur-bil-kala, the son of Tiglath-Pileser I.
3 Isin (PA-SE) was also called Pate'si ("the city of the high-priest" in Babylonia), according to W. A. I., ii. 53, 13.
4 That is, the Persian Gulf. Merodach-baladan is described below as also belonging to the dynasty of the country of the Sea, and his ancestral kingdom was that of the Kalda or Chaldees in Bit-yagina among the marshes at the mouth of the Euphrates.

{p.18}

20. for 6 months (and) 12 (days).

The next twelve lines of the column and the first line of the fourth column are destroyed.

COLUMN IV

2. Nebo-suma-yukin [the son of Dakuri] for ... (years).
3. Nabu-[natsir]¹ for [14] (years).
4. Nebo-nadin-ziri² his son for 2 (years).
5. Nebo-suma-yukin his son for 1 month and 12 days.
6. The 31 [kings?]³ of the dynasty of BABYLON.
7. Yukin-zira of the dynasty of SASI⁴ for 3 (years).
8. Pulu⁵ for 2 (years).
9. Ulula⁶ of the dynasty of TINU for 5 (years).
10. Merodach-abla-iddina (Merodach-baladan) of the dynasty of the country of the Sea for 12 (years).
11. Sargon for 5 (years).
12. Sin-akhe-erba (Sennacherib) of the dynasty of KHABI the greater for 2 (years).
13. Merodach-zakir-surni the son of Arad- ... for 1 month.
14. Merodach-abla-iddina a soldier of KHABI⁷ for 6 months.
15. Bel-ebus of the dynasty of Babylon for 3 (years).
16. Assur-nadin-sumi of the dynasty of KHABI the greater for 6 (years).
17. Nergal-zusezib for 1 (year).
_______
1 The Nabonassar of Ptolemy's Canon, BC 747.
2 Called Nadinu in the Babylonian Chronicle.
3 Possibly we should supply "years" instead of "kings."
4 The annals of Tiglath-Pileser III show that we should read Sapi or Sape. Yukinzira is the Khinziros of Ptolemy's Canon.
5 Pulu is the Pul of the Old Testament, the Poros of Ptolemy's Canon. His name is replaced by that of Tiglath-Pileser in the Babylonian Chronicle, and the two years of his reign correspond with the two years during which Tiglath-Pileser reigned over Babylonia.
6 The Shalmaneser of the Babylonian Chronicle and the Assyrian monuments, the Ilulaios of Ptolemy's Canon.
7 Does this imply that he was a different person from the famous Merodach-baladan, the contemporary of Sargon and Hezekiah?

{p.19}

18. Musezib-Merodach of the dynasty of BABYLON for 4 (years).
19. Sin-akhe-erba (Sennacherib) for 8 (years).
20. Assur-akhe-iddina (Esarhaddon) for [12 years].
21. Samas-suma-yukin (Saosdukhinos) for [20 years].
22. Kandal-[anu] (Khineladanos) for [22 years].

The rest of the tablet is destroyed.

{p.20}

No. 3. TRANSLATION OF THE THIRD DYNASTIC TABLET

Obv. COLUMN I

Only the ends of two lines in the middle have been preserved.

.... 600 (years) he reigned.
[The kings] ..... (were) in all.

Obv. COLUMN II

.... ili
(AN) Illadu¹ the son of the same for ... (years).
Mul-men-nunna ....
Kbit (?)-Kis the son of ....

Obv. COLUMN III

Is entirely lost. It contained about seventy lines.

Rev. COLUMN IV

[The dynasty] of BABYLON, [n kings for 294 years].
Sumu-[abi for 15 years].
Zabu [for 14 years.]
Abil-Sin [for 18 years].
Sin-[muballidh for 30 years].

The next six lines are destroyed.

The 1[1 kings of the dynasty of URU-AZAGGA].
For 3 [68 years].
An [man] ....
Ki[-AN-nigas] ....

The rest of the column is destroyed.

______
1 This was the Semitic reading; the Accadian seems to have been Pallil.

{p.21}

Rev. COLUMN V

The marshmen (?) of the country of the sea (were) in all: The leader of the marshmen (?) of the land of the sea (was) Simmas-sipak the son of Erba-Sin; whose reign was prosperous: his god brought him aid; for 17 years he reigned.
In the palace of Sargon (his corpse) was burned. Ea-mukin-zira established himself as king, the son of Kha'smar;¹ for 3 months he reigned. In the vestments of BIT-KHA'SMAR he was burned. Kassu-nadin-akhi the son of Sappa² reigned for 6 years.
[He was burned] in the palace. The 3 kings of the dynasty of the country of the Sea reigned for 23 years.
[E]-ulbar-sakin-sumi the son of Bazi reigned for 15 years: in the palace of KAK-MERODACH [he was burned].
[Uras]-kudurri-utsur the son of Bazi reigned for 2 years.
[SilanimJ-Suqamuna the son of Bazi reigned for 3 months: in the palace of Lu .... SA [he was burned].
[The 3] kings of the dynasty of the house of Bazi reigned for 20 years (and) 3 months ....
a descendant of the race of ELAM reigned for 6 years. In the palace of Sargon he was burned.
[One king] of the dynasty of ELAM reigned for 6 years.
The rest of the tablet is lost.
_______
1 May also be read Kutmar. The word meant "a hawk" in the Kassite language.
2 "The Sappite."

{p.22}

No. 4. TRANSLATION OF THE BABYLONIAN CHRONICLE

Obv. COLUMN I

1. [In the 3rd year of Nabonassar] king of BABYLON
2. [Tiglath-pileser] in ASSYRIA sat on the throne.
3. In the same year [Tiglath-pileser] descended into the country of ACCAD, and
4. the cities of RABBIKU and KHAMRANU he spoiled,
5. and the gods of the city of SAPAZZA he carried away.
6. In the time of Nabu-natsir (Nabonassar) the town of BORSIPPA
7. was separated from BABYLON. The battle which Nabonassar
8. fought against BORSIPPA is not described.¹
9. In the 5th year of Nabu-natsir Umma(n)-nigas
10. in ELAM sat upon the throne.
11. In (his) 14th year Nabu-natsir fell ill and died² in his palace.
12. For 14 years Nabu-natsir reigned over BABYLON.
13. Nadinu³ his son sat upon the throne in BABYLON.
14. In the second year Nadinu was slain in an insurrection.
15. For two years Nadinu reigned over BABYLON.
16. Suma-yukin⁴ the governor, the leader of the insurrection, sat upon the throne.
_________
1 That is, in the history from which the writer extracted his chronicles.
2 Literally "fate" (overtook him).
3 The Nebo-nadin-ziri ("Nebo has given a seed") of the Dynastic Tablet; Nadios in Ptolemy's Canon.
4 Called Nebo-suma-yukin in the Dynastic Tablet.

{p.23}

17. For 2 months and .... days Suma-yukin reigned over BABYLON.
18. Yukin-zira .... seized upon the throne.
19. In the 3d year of Yukin-zira Tiglath-pileser,
20. when he had descended into the country of ACCAD,
21. destroyed BIT-AMUKANU and captured Yukin-zira.
22. For 3 years Yukin-zira reigned over BABYLON.
23. Tiglath-pileser sat upon the throne in BABYLON.
24. In (his) 2d year Tiglath-pileser died in the month Tebet.¹
25. For [22] years Tiglath-pileser the sovereignty over ACCAD
26. and ASSYRIA had exercised. For two years he reigned in ACCAD.
27. On the 25th day of the month Tebet Sulman-asarid (Shalmaneser) in ASSYRIA
28. sat upon the throne. He destroyed the city of SAHARAHIN.²
29. In (his) 5th year Sulman-asarid died in the month Tebet.
30. For 5 years Sulman-asarid reigned over the countries of ACCAD and ASSYRIA.
31. On the 12th day of the month Tebet Sargon sat upon the throne in ASSYRIA.
32. In the month Nisan Merodach-baladan sat upon the throne in BABYLON.
33. In the 2d year of Merodach-baladan Umma(n)-nigas king of Elam
_______
1 December.
2 Not to be confounded with Samerina or Samaria. M. Halevy may be right in identifying it with the city of Sibraim mentioned in Ezek. xlvii. 16 as lying between Damascus and Hamath.

{p.24}

34. in the province of DUR-ILI fought a battle against Sargon king of ASSYRIA, and
35. caused a revolt from ASSYRIA: he overthrew them¹ utterly.
36. Merodach-baladan and his army, which to the assistance
37. of the king of ELAM had gone, did not obtain a battle: he arrived too late.²
38. In the 5th year of Merodach-baladan Umma(n)-nigas king of ELAM died.
39. [For 3 years] Umma(n)-nigas reigned over ELAM.
40. [Sutruk³-nankhun]du the son of his sister sat on the throne in ELAM.
41. up to the l0th year

The remaining lines of the column are destroyed.

COLUMN II

1. In the ... th year ....
2. A battle ....
3. For 12 years [Merodach-baladan reigned over BABYLON].⁴
4. Sargon [sat upon the throne in BABYLON].

The next fourteen lines are destroyed,

19. The Babylonians he did not oppress (?)⁵ ...
20. he (Sennacherib) was angry also with Merodach-baladan, and [took him prisoner];
21. he devastated his country, and ....
22. the cities of LARAK and SARRABA[NU'G he destroyed].
_______
1 That is, the Assyrians. The Annals of Sargon, on the other hand, claim the victory for Assyria, though Babylonia was left in the hands of Merodach-baladan.
2 Literally, "he undertook it too late" (ana'arki itsbat-so).
3 The Elamite Sutruk was identified by the Assyrians with their goddess Istar.
4 So restored by Winckler.
5 Ikhmi's.
6 See W. A. I., ii. 69, No. 5, 13. Larak was the Larankha of Berossos, which the Greek writer seems to have confounded with Surippak near Sippara.

{p.25}

23. After his capture (Sennacherib) placed Bel-ibni upon the throne in BABYLON.
24. In the first year of Bel-ibni Sennacherib
25. destroyed the cities of KHIRIMMA and KHARARATUM.
26. In the 3d year of Bel-ibni Sennacherib into the country of ACCAD
27. descended, and devastated the country of ACCAD.
28. Bel-ibni and his officers he transported into ASSYRIA.
29. For 3 years Bel-ibni reigned over BABYLON.
30. Sennacherib his son Assur-nadin-suma
31. placed upon the throne in BABYLON.
32. In the first year of Assur-nadin-suma Sutruk-[nan]-khundu¹ king of ELAM
33. was seized by his brother Khallusu who closed the gate before him.²
34. For 18 years Sutruk-[nan]khundu had reigned over ELAM.
35. His brother Khallusu sat upon the throne in ELAM.
36. In the 6th year of Assur-nadin-suma Sennacherib
37. descended into the country of ELAM, and the cities of NAGITUM, KHILMI,
38. PELLATUM and KHUPAPANU he destroyed.
39. He carried away their spoil. Afterwards Khallusu the king of ELAM
40. marched into the country of ACCAD and entered Sippara on the nianli (?).
41. He killed some people (but) the Sun-god did not issue forth from the temple of E-BABARA.
42. He captured Assur-nadin-suma and he was carried to ELAM.
43. For 6 years Assur-nadin-suma reigned over BABYLON.
______
1 Written Is-tar-khu-un-du. The Susian inscriptions of the king himself write the name Su-ut-ru-uk-[AN]-Nakh-khu-un-te.
2 That is, imprisoned him.

{p.26}

44. The king of ELAM placed Nergal-yusezib in BABYLON
45. on the throne. He caused [a revolt] from ASSYRIA.
46. In the 1st year of Nergal-yusezib, on the 16th day of the month Tammuz,¹
47. Nergal-yusezib captured NIPUR² and occupied its neighbourhood (?).
48. On the first day of the month Tammuz the soldiers of ASSYRIA had entered URUK.³

COLUMN III

1. They spoiled the gods belonging to URUK as well as its inhabitants.
2. Nergal-yusezib fled after the Elamites, and the gods be longing to URUK
3. as well as its inhabitants (the Assyrians) carried away. On the 7th day of the month Tisri⁴ in the province of NIPUR
4. he fought a battle against the soldiers of ASSYRIA and was taken prisoner in the conflict, and
5. he was carried to ASSYRIA. For 1 year and 6 months Nergal-yusezib
6. reigned over BABYLON. On the 26th day of the [month Tisri?]
7. against Khallusu king of ELAM his people revolted, [the gate before] him
8. they closed. They slew him. For 6 years Khallusu reigned over ELAM.
9. Kudur in ELAM sat upon the throne. Afterwards Sennacherib
10. descended into ELAM and from the country of RASI as far as
11. Bit-BURNA⁵ he devastated.
12. Musezib-Merodach sat upon the throne in BABYLON.
________
1 June.
2 Now Niffer.
3 Now Warka, the Erech of Gen. x. 10.
4 September.
5 Bit-Burna(-ki) is called Bit Buna(-ki) in the annals of Sennacherib.

{p.27}

13. In the first year of Musezib-Merodach on the 17th day of the month Ab¹
14. Kudur king of ELAM was seized in an insurrection and killed. For 10 months
15. Kudur had reigned over ELAM. Menanu in ELAM
16. sat upon the throne. I do not know the year² when the soldiers of ELAM and ACCAD
17. he collected together and in the city of KHALULE a battle against ASSYRIA
18. he fought, and caused a revolt from Assyria.³
19. In the 4th year of Musezib-Merodach on the 15th day of Nisan⁴
20. Menanu king of ELAM was paralysed,⁵ and
21. his mouth was seized and he was deprived of speech.
22. On the first day of the month Kisleu⁶ the city [of BABYLON] was taken, Musezib-Merodach
23. was taken and led away to ASSYRIA.
24. For 4 years Musezib-Merodach reigned over BABYLON.
25. On the 7th day of the month Adar⁷ Menanu king of ELAM died.
26. For 4 years Menanu reigned over ELAM.
27. Khumma-khaldasu⁸ in ELAM sat upon the throne.
28. In the eighth year of the king there was ... in Babylon. On the 3d day of the month Tammuz
29. the gods belonging to ERECH went down from the city of ERIDU⁹ to ERECH.
_______
1 July.
2 The chronicler's sources here failed him, but Winckler has pointed out that the battle of Khalule must have taken place in either BC 691 or 690.
3 The annals of Sennacherib claim a complete victory for the Assyrians.
4 March.
5 Literally, "Tetanus constricted him" (misidtuv imisid, cf. W. A. I., ii. 27. 47, 48).
6 November.
7 February.
8 Called Umman-aldas in the Assyrian inscriptions.
9 Eridu was on the coast of the Persian Gulf.

{p.28}

30. On the 3d day of the month Tisri Khumma-khaldasu the king of ELA.M by the Fire-god
31. was stricken and perished through the power (?) of the god. For 8 years Khumma-khaldasu
32. reigned over ELAM.
33. Khumma-khaldasu the second in the country of ELAM sat upon the throne.
34. On the 20th day of the month Tebet,¹ Sennacherib king of ASSYRIA
35. by his own son² was murdered in an insurrection. For [24] years Sennacherib
36. reigned over Assyria. From the 20th day of the month Tebet until
37. the 2d day of the month Adar is described as a period of insurrection in ASSYRIA.
38. On the 8th day of the month Sivan³ Assur-akhi-iddina (Esar-haddon) his son sat on the throne in ASSYRIA.
39. In the first year of Esar-haddon, Zira-kina-esir⁴ of the sea coast,⁵
40. when he had laid fetters on the city of ERECH, the city of [ERECH?]
41. destroyed in sight of the officers of ASSYRIA and [fled] to the country of ELAM.
42. In ELAM the king of ELAM took him and [slew him] with the sword.
43. In a month I do not know the officer called Gu-enna was ... in the city of NIPUR.
44. In the month Elul,⁶ the god Gu'si⁷ and the gods [of the city of ....]
_______
1 December.
2 It will be noticed that the chronicler speaks of only one son, whereas two are named in the Old Testament.
3 May.
4 Called by Esar-haddon Nebo-zira-kina-esir ("Nebo has directed the established seed"), the son of Merodach-baladan.
5 That is, of the Persian Gulf.
6 August.
7 "The god of the favourable mouth," a local divinity (perhaps be longing to Sippara, W. A. I., v. 31, 30), and identified with Uras (W. A. I., ii. 57, 54).

{p.29}

45. proceeded to DUR-ILI; [the gods of ]
46. proceeded to DUR-SARGON
47. In the month Adar the heads of
48. In the second year the major-domo

The next two lines are destroyed.

Rev. COLUMN IV

1. .... akhe-sullim the Gu-enna.
2. ... [the Gimir]ri¹ marched against ASSYRIA and in ASSYRIA were slain.
3. ... the city of SIDON was taken; its spoil was carried away.
4. The major-domo mustered a gathering in ACCAD.
5. In the 5th year on the 2d day of the month Tisri the Assyrian soldiers BAZZA²
6. occupied. In the month Tisri the head of the king of the country of SIDON
7. was cut off, and brought to Assyria. In the month Adar the head of the king
8. of the countries of GUNDU and Si'su³ was cut off and brought to ASSYRIA.
9. In the 6th year the king of ELAM entered SIPPARA. He offered sacrifices. The Sun-god⁴ from
10. the temple of E-BAUARA did not issue forth. The Assyrians marched into EGYPT. ETHIOPIA was troubled.⁵
_______
1 So restored by Winckler. The Gimirra are the Gonier of the Old Testament, the Kimmerians of classical writers.
2 Apparently the district of Arabia Petrita called Bazu by Esar-hathlon, Buz in the Old Testament.
3 Probably in Kilikia.
4 The Sun-god whose temple has been discovered by Mr. Hormuzd Rassam in the mounds of Abu-Habba was the patron-deity of Sipar or Sippara. Besides "Sippara of the Sun-god," there was a neighbouring city called "Sippara of Anunit." The two together formed the Scriptural Sepharvaim or "two Sipparas."
5 Melitkh imina.

{p.30}

11. Khumma-khaldasu the king of ELAM without being sick died in his palace.
12. For 5 years Khumma-khaldasu reigned over ELAM.
13. Urtagu his brother sat upon the throne in ELAM.
14. In a month I do not know Nadin-Suma the Gu-enna
15. and Kudur the son of Dakuri went to ASSYRIA.
16. In the 7th year on the 5th day of the month Adar the soldiers of ASSYRIA marched into EGYPT.
17. In the month Adar Istar of the city of ACCAD and the gods of the city of ACCAD
18. had departed from the country of ELAM and on the 10th day of the month Adar entered the city of ACCAD.
19. In the 8th year of Esar-haddon in the month Tebet on a day of which the date has been lost¹
20. the country of the RURIZA was occupied; its spoil was carried away.
21. In the month Kisleu its spoil was brought into the city of UR.
22. On the 5th day of the month Adar the wife of the king died.
23. In the tenth year in the month Nisan the soldiers of ASSYRIA marched into Egypt.²
24. On the 3rd day of the month Tarnmuz and also on the 16th and 18th days
25. three times the Egyptians were defeated with heavy loss.³
26. On the 22nd day Memphis,⁴ the royal city, was captured.
27. Its king fled; his son descended into the country of [ETHIOPIA].
_______
1 In the history from which the chronicler derived his account.
2 The chronicler notes here that the last character in the line was wanting in his copy.
3 Literally, "massacres took place in Egypt."
4 Written Membi.

{p.31}

28. Its spoil was carried away; [its] men were [enslaved]; its goods were
29. In the 11th year the king [remained] in ASSYRIA; his officers.
30. In the 16th year the king of ASSYRIA
31. On the march he fell ill, and died on the 10th day of the month Marchesvan.¹
32. For 12 years Esar-haddon reigned over ASSYRIA.
33. Saul-suma-yukina in BABYLON, Assur-bani-pal in ASSYRIA, his two sons, sat on the throne.
34. In the accession year of Saul-suma-yukina in the month Iyyar,²
35. Bel and the gods of ACCAD from the city of ASSUR
36. had gone forth and on the nth day of the month Iyyar had entered into BABYLON.
37. In that year [against] the city of KIRBITUM³ [there was war] ; its king is conquered.]
38. On the 20th day of the month Tebet Bel-edir-nisi (?) in BABYLON is seized and put to death.
39. The first part (of the chronicle) has been written like its original and has been made public.
40. The tablet of Ana-Bel-KAN the son of Libludhu
41. the son of Nis-Sin, by the hand of Ea-iddin the son of
42. Ana-Bel-KAN the son of Libludhu of Babylon,
43. the 5th day of the month .... the 22nd year of Darius king of BABYLON,
44. the king of the world.
________
1 October.
2 April.
3 Apparently the city of Karbat in Northern Egypt, conquered by Assur-bani-pal at the commencement of his reign.

{p.32}

No. 5. TRANSLATION OF THE INSCRIPTION GIVING THE ASSYRIAN INTERPRETATION
OF THE NAMES OF THE EARLY BABYLONIAN KINGS

Obv. COLUMN I

About forty lines lost.

1. [? Ur-Damu. Acc.¹] "Man of the goddess GULA."
2. [? Babar-uru. Acc.] "The Sun-god protects."
3. [Ur- ...]la. Acc. "Man of the Moon-god."
4. [Ur-]Babara. Acc. "Man of the Sun-god."
5. [Is-ki-]pal. Acc. "Sweeper away of the hostile country."
6. [Gul-ki-]sar. Acc. "Destroyer of hosts."
7. A-[dara]-kalama. Acc. "Son of the god EA king of the land."
8. A-kur-du-ana. Acc. "Son of BEL (the mountain) of the treasury of heaven."
9. Lugal-ginna. Acc. "Established king"(Sargon).²
10. The queen Azag-Bau. "The goddess BAU is holy." Acc.
11. These are the kings who after the flood are not described in chronological order.
12. Khammu-ragas. Kas³ "Of a large family."
13. Ammi-didugga. Kas. "Of an established family."
14. Kur-gal-zu. Kas. "Be a shepherd."
________
1 That is, Accado-Sumerian.
2 The name of the king was really Sarganu (perhaps of the same origin as the Biblical Serug), but his Accadian subjects misunderstood it, turning it into Sarru-kinu, "established king," which was written in Sumerian Lugal-ginna.
3 That is, Kassite or Kosscean.

{p.33}

15. Simmas-sipak. Kas. "Offspring of MKRODACH."
16. Ulam-bur-yas. Kas. "Offspring of the lord of the world."
17. Nazi-Murudas. Kas. "The shadow of URAS."
18. Meli-Sipak. Kas. "Man of MERODACH."
19. Burna-bur-yas. Kas. "Servant [of the lord of the world]."
20. Kara-Urus. Kas. "Minister of [BEL]."

COLUMN II

About thirty -three lines are lost.

1. [an-]khegal. Acc. "With MERODACH is life."
2. [an-]khegal. Acc. "With MERODACH is verdure."
3. Lu-Silig-lu-sar. Acc. " Man of MERODACH."
4. Un-kur-Silig-alim. Acc. "The lord of the land is MERODACH."
5. Gu-sermal-Tutu. Acc. " The closer of the mouth is MERODACH."
6. Sazu-[AN]kusvu. Acc. " MERODACH is an over shadowing god."
7. Sazu-ap-tila-nen-gu. Acc. "MERODACH has declared life to him."
8. Ur-Nin-din-bagga. Acc. "Man of GULA [the goddess of life and death]."
9. Khumeme. Acc. " Man of GULA."
10. Dili-khidu. Acc. "(Man of) the god PAP-SUKAL."¹
11. Mu-na-tila. Acc. " May his name live."
12. Nannak-satu. Acc. "The Moon -god has begotten."
13. Nannak-agal-duabi. Acc. "The Moon-god is strong over all."
14. Labar-Nu-dimmud. Acc. "Servant of EA [lord of the universe]."
15. Urudu-man-sun. Acc. "The god NUSKU has given."
______
1 Literally "the messenger of the treasury (of heaven)."

{p.34}

16. Kud-ur-Alima. Acc. "Sweet are the loins of BEL."
17. Dun-aga-ba-khe-til. Acc. "May BAU vivify her womb."
18. Damu-mu-as-khe-gal. Acc. "May GULA be one name."
19. Dun-gal-tur-tae. Acc. "May BAU establish great and small."
20. Tutu-bul-anta-gal. Acc. "O MERODACH as a comrade spare her (?)."
21. Dugga-makh-Sazu. Acc. "Supreme is the word of MERODACH."
22. Khedu-lamma-ra. Acc. "PAP-SUKAL is the colossus."
23. Mul-khe-sal. Acc. " May BEL be exalted."
24. Dimir-Uru-du. Acc. "The Moon-god as son [of the city UR]."
25. Dimir-Umk-du. Acc. "The god who is the son of [ERECH]."
26. Dimir-Erida-du-ru. Acc. "A [as son of ERIDU, the creator]."

The next two lines are destroyed.

Rev. COLUMN II

The first two lines are destroyed.

1 ...a-edina. Acc. "The choir of the goddess ZARPANIT."
2. Si-ru. Acc. "BEL has created."
3. Kur-nigin-garra-gurus-nene. Acc. "URAS is their first-born."
4. Uras-saglitar1-zae-men. Acc. "URAS, thou art overseer."
5. Uras-qalzi-nes-kiam-mama. Acc. "URAS who loves constancy."
6. Mul-lil-ki-bi-gi. Acc. "BEL of Nipur has returned to his place."
7. Laghlaghghi-Gar. Acc. "NEBO illuminates."
8. Kur-gal-nin-mu-pada. Acc "The great mountain (BEL). records the name."
________
1 The correct reading of this word is doubtful.

{p.35}

9. Aba-Sanabi-dari. Acc. "Who is like BEL a bride groom."
10. Aba-Sanabi-diri. Acc. "Who is like BEL (the lord) of counsel."
11. Es-Guzi-gin-du. Acc. "The temple of E-SAGGIL the establishment of the son."
12. Khu-un-zuh. Acc. "BEL who knows mankind."
13. Nab-sakh-menna. Acc. "BEL, prosper me."
14. Massu-gal-Babara-gude. Acc. "What is shorn by RIMMON."
15. Ur-Sanabi. Acc. "The man of EA."
16. Lu-Damu. Acc. "The man of GULA."
17. Tutul-Savul. Acc. "The Sun-god has mustered."
18. Nin-sakh-gu-nu-tatal. Acc. "PAP-SUKAL who changes not (his) command."
19. Agu-sag-algi. Acc. "The Moon-god has given a son."¹
20. Agu-ba-tila. Acc. "May the Moon-god vivify what is below him."
21. Larru-ningub-al. Acc. "O BEL, defend the land mark."
22. Lubar-E-gir-azagga. Acc. "Servant of NERGAL."
23. Bad-Mullilla. Acc. "Minister of BEL."
24. Xanak-gula. Acc. "The Moon-god is great."
25. .... nu-laragh-danga-su-mu-aldibba. Acc. "(O Sun-)god, in difficulties and dangers take my hand."
26. [Es-Guzi-]kharsag-men. Acc. "E-SAGGIL is our mountain."

More than thirty lines are destroyed here.

COLUMN IV

1. Ulam-Urus. Kas. "Offspring of BEL."
2. Meli-Khali. Kas. "Man of GULA."
________
1 The Assyro-Babylonian translation is a paraphrase, as in some other instances. The Accado-Sumerian compound is literally: "The Moon-god has established a head."

{p.36}

3. Meli-Sumu. Kas. "Man of the god SUQA-MUNA."
4. Meli-Sibarru. Kas. "Man of the god SIMALIA."
5. Meli-Sakh. Kas. "Man of the Sun-god."
6. Nimgirabi. Kas. "The merciful."
7. Nimgirabi-Sakh. Kas. "Merciful is the Sun-god."
8. Nimgirabi-Buryas. Kas. "Merciful is [BEL the lord of the world]."
9. Kara-Buryas. Kas. "Servant of [BEL lord of the world]."
10. Kara-Sakh. Kas. "Servant of the Sun-god."
11. Nazi-Sipak. Kas. ["Shadow of MERODACH."]
12. Nazi-Buryas. Kas. ["Shadow of BEL lord] of the world."]

The remaining eight lines are lost.

{p.37}

No. 6. TRANSLATION OF THE ANNALS OF SARGON OF ACCAD AND NARAM-SIN¹

When the moon at its setting with the colour of a dust-cloud² filled the crescent, the moon was favourable for Sargon who at this season marched against the country of ELA.M and subjugated the men of ELAM.
Misery (?) he brought upon them; their food he cut off.
When the moon at its setting filled the crescent with the colour of a dust-cloud, and over the face of the sky the colour extended behind the moon during the day and remained bright, the moon was favourable for Sargon who marched against the country of [PHOENICIA], and subjugated the country of PHOENICIA. His hand conquered the four quarters (of the world).
7. When the moon increased in form on the right hand and on the left, and moreover [during] the day the finger reached over the horns,³
________
1 W. A. I., iv. 34. The text has been translated in part by Mr. George Smith. The astrological notices with which the account of Sargon s campaigns is associated are explained by the fact that the great Chaldean work on astronomy and astrology was compiled for his library at Accad, and that one of the objects of this work was to trace a connection between certain astronomical occurrences and the events which immediately followed them.
2 Ana pikhirti-su tsirip zakiki.
3 The moon lay on its back, and the distance from the extremity of one horn to that of another was as much as a span.

{p.38}

8. the moon was favourable for Sargon who at this season produced joy (?) [in] BABYLON, and
9. [like] dust the spoil of BAB-DHUNA was carried away and
10. ... he made ACCAD a city; the city of .... he called its name;
11. [the men of .... in the] midst he caused to dwell.
12. [When the moon] on the left the colour of fire [on] the left of the planet, and
13. [the moon was favourable to Sargo]n who at this season against the country of PHOENICIA
14. [marched and subjugated it]. The four quarters (of the world) his hand conquered.
15. [When the moon] behind the moon the four heads were placed,
16. [the moon was favourable to Sargon who at this season] marched [against] the country of PHOENICIA and
17. [subjugated the country of PHOENICIA.] His [enemies?] he smote; his heroes
18 in the gate of its¹ rising.
19. [When the moon was fixed?] and a span [the moon was favourable to Sargon] as for whom at this season the goddess [ISTAR]
20. [with favours] filled for him his hand the goddess ISTAR [all countries]
21. caused him to conquer; against Tiri (?)....
22. [When the moon] appeared [like] a lion, the moon was favourable to Sargon who at this season
23. was [very] exalted and a rival (or) equal had not; his own country was at peace. Over
24. [the countries] of the sea of the setting sun² he crossed and for 3 years at the setting sun
________
1 The Sun-god must be referred to.
2 The Mediterranean.

{p.39}

25. [all countries] his hand conquered. Every place to form but one (empire) he appointed. His images at the setting sun
26. he erected. Their spoil he caused to pass over into the countries of the sea.¹
27. [When the moon on] the right hand was like the colour of gall, and there was no finger;² the upper part was long and the moon was setting (?),
28. [the moon was favourable for] Sargon who enlarged his palace of Delight (?) by 5 initklnt, and
29. established the chiefs [in it] and called it the House of Kiam-izallik.³
30. When the moon was like a cloud (?), like the colour of gall, and there was no finger; on the right side was the colour of a sword; the circumference of the left side was visible;
31. towards its face on the left the colour extended; the moon was favourable for Sargon against whom at this season Kastubila of the country of KAZALLA rebelled and against KAZALLA
32. (Sargon) marched and he smote their forces; he accomplished their destruction.
33. Their mighty army he annihilated; he reduced KAZALLA to dust and ruins.
34. The station of the birds⁴ he overthrew.
35. When the moon was like a cloud (?), like the colour of
_______
1 We infer from this that Sargon had crossed over into Cyprus, and there erected an image of himself. This might explain why his later name sake Sargon sent to the island a monument, which is now in Berlin. General di Cesnola brought back from Cyprus a Babylonian cylinder of haematite bearing the inscription.
2 Abil-Istar, the son of Ilu-Balidh, the servant of the deified N'aram-Sin. The cylinder was probably executed either during the reign of Naram-Sin, or shortly afterwards, as the cult of the king is not likely to have continued after the fall of his dynasty.
3 It could not be measured.
3 "Thus he has appointed."
4 What this refers to it is impossible to say. The expression can hardly be metaphorical.

{p.40}

gall, and there was no finger;¹ on the right side was the colour of a sword; the circumference of the left was visible;
36. and against its face the Seven² advanced; the moon was favourable to Sargon, against whom at this season
37. the elders of the whole country revolted and besieged him in the city of ACCAD; but
38. Sargon issued forth and smote their forces; their destruction he accomplished.

REVERSE

1. Their numerous soldiery he massacred; the spoil that was upon them he collected.
2. "The booty of Istar!" he shouted.
3. When the moon had two fingers, and swords were seen on the right side and the left, [and] might and peace were on the left
4. its hand presented a sword; the sword in its left hand was of the colour of sukhuruni; the point was held in the left hand and there were two heads;
5. [the moon] was favourable for Sargon who at this season
6. subjected the men of [the country] of SU-EDIN³ in its plenitude to the sword, and
7. Sargon caused their seats to be occupied, and
8. smote their forces; their destruction he accomplished; their mighty army
9. he cut off, and his troops he collected; into the city of ACCAD he brought (them) back.
10. [When the moon] had two fingers and on the right side it was of the colour of a sword and on the left it was visible;
_______
1 It could not be measured.
2 The Seven Evil Spirits who were supposed to cause eclipses of the moon.
3 "The plain of the Suti," or nomad tribes on the eastern side of Babylonia.

{p.41}

11. [and against its face] the Seven advanced; (its) appearance was of the colour of gall; the moon was favour able for Naram-Sin
12. [who at] this season marched against the city of APIRAK and
13. [utterly] destroyed it: Ris-Rimmon the king of APIRAK
14. [he overthrew], and the city of APIRAK his hand conquered.
15. [When the moon] on the right it was of the colour of a sword, and on the left it was visible;
16. [and against its face the Seven advanced?]; the moon was favourable for Naram-Sin who at this season
17. marched [against the country of MAJGANNA]¹ and seized the country of MAGANNA, and
18 the king of MAGANNA his hand captured.
19. [When against the moon] the Seven were banded, [and] behind it
20 never may there be a son (?)
________
1 The Sinaitic Peninsula.

{p.42}

THE INSCRIPTIONS OF TELLOH
BY M. ARTHUR AMIAUD

THE names of Telloh and of the French Consul M. de Sarzec are no longer strange to the Orientalist of to-day. The situation of the mounds, which have hidden and preserved to our day the ruins of one of the most ancient centres of civilisation, is well known. The history of the excavations has been often written, and I shall not dwell upon it. Nor shall I discuss the results of these excavations from the point of view of art or archaeology. This work has been undertaken by a master hand in the Decouvertes en Chaldee.¹ At present I shall only essay to follow in the steps of Dr. Oppert by making the monuments of stone and brick tell their own tale, and by questioning them summarily on the geography, history, politics, and religion of their age and country.²

I. The first question one thinks of asking is what was the name of that flourishing city of ancient Chaldea which the Bedouin now knows only as
_____
1 See also M. Leon Heuzey's Un Palais Chaldeen (Paris, Leroux, 1888).
2 On all these points, see Hommel's Geschichte Babyloniens und Assyriens (Berlin, 1885-87).

{p.43}

Telloh? Considering that all the princes whose names occur on the monuments are entitled "kings" or "patesis" of Sliirpurla-ki, it was generally answered at first: This city was Shirpurla.¹ As often happens, the first impression has proved to be correct. I was wrong in questioning the identification in an article in the Zeitschrift fur Keilschriftforschung (1. p. 151). I had remarked that except in the title of the kings and patesis the name of Shirpurla-ki appeared very rarely in the inscriptions of Telloh, and that whenever a prince mentioned the site where a temple was erected he gave it another name Girsu-ki, Uru-azagga, Nina-ki, Gishgalla-ki. I now believe, and shall attempt to prove, that Telloh really represents the ruins of Shirpurla; that it was the general name of a great centre of population, of which Girsu-ki, Uru-azagga, Nina-ki, and Gishgalla-ki were only divisions or quarters.

Let us first remove a hypothesis which could present itself to the mind. Might not Shirpurla be the name of a country, of which Girsu-ki and the three other cities mentioned above were the chief places? This supposition is forbidden by the inscription of the statue F of Gudea, which states formally that Shirpurla was the beloved "city" of the goddess Gatumdug (col. i., cases 15, 16). It is also forbidden
_______
1 According to Mr. Pinches (Guide to the Kouyunjik Gallery, London, 1885, p. 7, note 2), Shir-pur-la-ki would be an ideographic mode of writing the word Lagash. We should then perhaps have to compare W. A. I., ii. 52, a 60, which seems to connect a city Lagashu-ki with Urama or "Ur" (?).

{p.44}

by W. A. I., ii. 61, 2, 37, where we learn that a temple otherwise unknown was situated in Shirpurla-ki.

The list of temples given in this passage might open the door to another hypothesis, which must be removed in its turn, for it would be inconsistent with the relations existing between Shirpurla and the four other towns. In lines 34 and 35 two temples are named as temples of Girsu-ki. If Girsu-ki had been only a quarter of Shirpurla, would there not be some inconsistency on the part of the Assyrian scribe in saying: Such and such temples belong to Girsu-ki, such another to Shirpurla-ki? Might one not conclude that Shirpurla and the four other towns were separate cities?

Now it is certain that Gudea tells us (in the inscription on statue C) that he has constructed the temple of E-anna for the goddess Ninni or Istar in Girsu-ki (col. 3, cases 11, 12). We further know that the same Istar, the presiding deity of Erech, had a celebrated temple in that city which also bore the name of E-anna. Moreover, certain texts of Gudea and Dungi, which mention the construction of temples in Girsu-ki, come, it is believed, from other sites than Telloh, some from Warka or Erech, others from Babylon, from Zerghul and from Tel-Eed. But this proves nothing in favour of Erech, and still less against Telloh. From the fact that Istar had a temple named E-anna at Erech, we cannot infer that the same god dess had not a temple of the same name in another city. We know that Nebo had a temple called {p.45} E-Zida in Borsippa, and there were at least two others of the same name at Babylon and Calah.

We cannot look for Nina-ki, any more than Girsu-ki, outside Telloh, or identify it with the Assyrian Nineveh.¹ As for the inscription cited by Dr. Hommel in support of the contrary view, the Museum of the Louvre possesses several similar ones discovered by M. de Sarzec at Telloh. If the text translated by Dr. Hommel does not come from Telloh, it must have been moved from its original place, like the tablet of black stone, with a Semitic inscription of Dungi, believed to have been found at Nineveh, and accordingly quoted by Dr. Hommel to show that the empire of the kings of Ur extended as far as that city. The text itself of the inscription, imperfectly copied by Lenormant, proves that its primitive resting-place was Cutha.² But yet more. Two princes of Shirpurla, Uru-Kagina in his barrel-inscription, and Gudea in the cylinder- inscription A, state that they have worked upon a canal, Nina-ki-tum-a, "the favourite river of the goddess Nina." In order to find this canal I believe it will be useless to ascend as far as the Khausser, the river of Nineveh, if we compare with the context these lines of M. de Sarzec: "In going from the Shatt-el-Hai to the ruins, at 500 metres from the enceinte of Telloh we meet with the bed of an immense canal, still visible, though filled with sand, running from N.W. to S.E. It is possibly the
_________
1 The pronunciation of the name of the goddess Nina, and of the city called after her is still problematical.
2 See the Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, iii., p. 94.

{p.46}

original channel of the Shatt-el-Hat, possibly also some canal derived from that great artery, and intended to supply the city with water."¹

Uru-azagga and Gishgalla-ki still remain. The first must be sought near Telloh, if not in Telloh itself, since M. de Sarzec has found in the ruins: (1) at least one brick commemorating the erection by Gudea of a temple of the goddess Gatumdug situated in Uru-azagga;² (2) the forepart of a lion or griffon of calcareous stone, which bears the same inscription as the brick of Gudea, some insignificant variants excepted;³ (3) a doorstep of the patesi Nammaghani, intended for the temple of the goddess Bau, which the inscriptions on several statues of Gudea place in Uru-azagga;⁴ (4) a buttress of the patesi Entena intended for the temple of the goddess Gatumdug in Uru-azagga.⁵ As for Gishgalla-ki, which is known only from two passages in the inscription on the statue of Ur-Bau, one of which calls the patesi "servant of the divine king of Gishgalla-ki," and the other places in Gishgalla-ki a temple of the goddess Ninni, its name even remains an obscure problem. It must have been some locality in Telloh or its immediate vicinity. Otherwise the inscription of Ur-Bau would offer us the only example in our texts of a foreign temple constructed by the princes of Shirpurla, and the sole
__________
1 Decouvertes en Chaldee, p. 12.
2 Not yet published.
3 I owe my knowledge of this fact, as well as of several others, to the kindness of M. Heuzey.
4 Decouvertes en Chaldee, pl. 27, i.
5 Not yet published.

{p.47}

example also of the title of "servant" of a foreign god assumed by one of them.

It will now be easy for me to show that the four centres, Girsu-ki, Uru-azagga, Nina-ki, and Gishgalla-ki, were only quarters. of a large city, which bore the name of Shirpurla-ki. Whenever the princes who have reigned at Telloh wished to indicate the whole of their capital or their domain, we shall see that they called it Shirpurla-ki. Only when they preferred to mark the extent of their domain by means of its extreme or most important points, or when they wanted to indicate a particular spot, they employed the names Girsu-ki, Uru-azagga, Nina-ki, and Gish-galla-ki.

It is thus that all call themselves "kings" or "patesis" of Shirpurla-ki. There is but one exception, and only in one of the three inscriptions he has left us; Uru-Kagina entitles himself on his cylinder "king of Girsu-ki." This exception can be easily explained, since Girsu-ki was without doubt the most important quarter of Shirpurla. It is thus again that Gudea, wishing to inform us what were the distant countries from which he derived the materials necessary for the buildings of his capital, expresses himself as follows: "By the power of Nina and Nin-girsu, to Gudea who holds his sceptre from Nin-Girsu, the countries of Magan, Melughgha, Gubi, and Nituk, rich in trees of every species, have sent him at Shirpurla-ki ships laden with all sorts of trees" (statue D, col. 4). Thus, too, if I understand the passage rightly, after {p.48} having enumerated the reforms which followed his accession to the throne, he describes the peace resulting therefrom to his country: "On the territory of Shirpurla-ki no one has sued him who has right on his side; a brigand has entered the house of no one" (statue B, col. 5).

But if the same Gudea wants to insist on the peace which he has given his country, and to prove that no part of his city was excluded from his care, he tells us: "Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla-ki, has proclaimed peace from Girsu-ki to Uru-azagga" (statue G, col. 2). So, too, in describing the position of a temple, the princes of Telloh never say that it was situated in Shirpurla, but more precisely in Girsu-ki, in Uru-azagga, in Nina-ki, or in Gishgalla-ki.

It is very difficult at present to determine the approximate situation in Telloh of these different quarters. I will, however, make some suggestions in regard to them.

The four tels or mounds on the west side of Telloh perhaps represent the site of Nina-ki. From one of them M. de Sarzec has recovered the beautiful bull and the tablet of black stone which bear the name of Dungi, and mention the erection of the temple of the goddess Nina. All the other tels, including the great tel on which stood the palace, appear to have formed part of Girsu-ki. It is in this region that bronzes and votive tablets have been discovered with the names of the god Nin-Girsu and of his sons Gal-alim and Dun-shagana; now we cannot doubt, though we {p.49} are not directly assured of it, that the temples of these three gods were situated in Girsu-ki. As for Uru-azagga, it is not certain that it lay in the part of Telloh excavated by M. de Sarzec. With the exception of some statues, which have certainly not been found in their original position, the monuments intended, according to their inscriptions, for this quarter of Shirpurla-ki are little numerous; and some, if not all, appear to have been displaced, and, to use the expression of M. Heuzey, to have been replaced by the successive occupants of Telloh, which was still in habited in the Parthian epoch. Nothing can be said concerning Gishgalla-ki, which is mentioned only on the statue of Ur-Bau.

II. We now possess the names of twelve or thirteen princes of Shirpurla, four or five of whom bear the title of "king," and eight the title of "patesi." M. Heuzey has shown by arguments derived from the more archaic character of their monuments and writing that the most ancient of these princes were the kings. He has also established that among the patesis the group comprising Entena and En-anna-tumma was the oldest. The script used by these patesis is still linear like that of the kings, and not yet cuneiform like that of the later princes. Of course I refer only to the inscriptions engraved on hard materials, bronze or stone. For we possess a clay cylinder of the king Uru-Kagina, where the wedge already appears as distinctly as on the bricks and cylinders of Gudea. We know that it is just by {p.50} the form of the stylus employed by the scribes when writing upon soft clay that the wedge which characterises the cuneiform script is explained. It is by imitation only that it has passed from writing on clay to writing on stone.

The dynasties of Telloh were the following:

(1) Kings of Shirpurla-ki: The earliest king known is perhaps Ur-Nina, "the man of Nina," of whom we have three inscriptions. This prince was the son of a personage called Nini-ghal-gin (the reading Ghal-gin being uncertain). It is doubtful whether Nini-ghal-gin had himself been king, since his son never gives him the title of sovereign.

After Ur-Nina, according to the "Stele of the Vultures," his son, A-Kurgal ("the son of Bel"?) reigned.

Another passage in the Stele of the Vultures appears to mention a certain Igi-ginna ("he who goes before") as king of Shirpurla.

So far as we can judge from the writing, it was after these monarchs that Uru-kagina reigned,¹ whose three inscriptions have come down to us. Two of them call him "king of Shirpurla"; in a third, on a clay cylinder, he bears, as was first recognised by Dr. Oppert, the title of "king of Girsu-ki."²

(2) Patesis of Shirpurla-ki:

The first series comprises three patesis, whose suc-
______
1 See Heuzey: "Un nouvcau roi dc Tello," in the Revue Archeologique of 1884.
2 It would seem that a prince more ancient than Uru-Kagina and perhaps as ancient as Ur-Nina bore the title of "patesi" and not of "king." But his name still remains unknown. See below, p. 67.

{p.51}

cession cannot at present be exactly determined. The museum of the Louvre possesses a portion of a buttress inscribed with the name of a patesi Entena, who docs not record the name of his father, and another block bearing the name of a patesi En-anna-t'um'ma, son of a patesi Entena. As the British Museum possesses a block inscribed by a patesi Entena, son of a patesi En-anna-tumma, we have a choice of two hypotheses. Either the patesi Entena of the British Museum is the same as the patesi Entena of the Louvre, in which case the succession will be: En-anna-tumma I, Entena, and En-anna-tumma II; or else the Entena of the British Museum is the grandson of that of the Louvre, the order of the patesis being Entena I, En-anna-tumma, Entena II.

Later in date than this family of princes comes the patesi Ur-Bau ("man of Bau") whose statue is in the Louvre, together with a number of monuments of less importance.

A short time after Ur-Bau comes Gudea ("the elect"), followed by his son and probable successor Ur-Nin-girsu ("man of Nin-girsu").¹ It is of Gudea that the larger and more important part of the monuments of Telloh preserve the memory: eight statues, two large cylinders of clay, and hundreds of fragments or small texts. Of his successor we have a few bricks and a small object of uncertain use.

Here must be placed, I believe, the patesi Nam-
_______
1 Cf. Lcdrain: Communication a l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettre, 12th July 1882.

{p.52}

maghani ("His supremacy") whose reign is assigned by Dr. Hommel to a period before Ur-Bau. But his monuments are too few (only a door-step and some bricks) to allow us to determine with certainty his relative date.

M. Heuzey has also made us acquainted with an other patesi, Luka-ni ("His glory").¹ His son Ghala-lamma, who does not, like his father, take the title of patesi, offers homage in an inscription on the fragment of a statue to Dungi, king of Ur.²

It is difficult to determine, even approximately, to what remote epoch the dynasties of Telloh must be referred. We gather but little from the fact that the son of one of the last patesis of Shirpurla was the contemporary of Dungi. For we cannot yet fix the age of the early kings of Ur. Let me, however, hazard a hypothesis, in consideration of any light it may throw on the dark problem of Chaldean chronology.

I have already had occasion to cite an inscription of Gudea (on statue D) in which this patesi tells us that he received from "the countries of Magan, Me-lughgha, Gubi, and Nituk," vessels laden with all sorts of trees. The situation of Nituk is known. It was the Isle of Tilmun³ in the Persian Gulf. It is not
_______
1 "Le Roi Dounghi " in the Revue Archeologique, April 1886.
2 I omit a patesi of Shirpurla, En-anna, made known to us by George Smith in his Early History of Babylonia, and two other patesis whose names are quoted by Dr. Hommel from some seals (Geschichte Bab. und Ass., pp. 290, 293). The text translated by George Smith has not yet been published, and the reading of the inscriptions on the seals does not seem absolutely certain.
3 Identified with the Tylos of classical geography by Dr. Oppert, and with the modern Bahrein by Sir H. Rawlinson, though Professor Delitzsch

{p.53}

possible, in my opinion, to look for Magan and Me-lughgha anywhere else than in the vicinity of the Sinaitic Peninsula.¹ Gubi, sometimes written Gubin, alone remains, which Dr. Hommel would identify with Byblos in Phoenicia, the Gapuna of the hieroglyphic texts. I should, however, prefer to see in Gubi a name of Egypt, and more precisely the name of Coptos, the ancient Qubti. Gudea would thus in his list of names have followed the route of his vessels, starting from the most distant points to the north of the Red Sea, coasting along Egypt and turning round Arabia. If the identification of Gubi or Gubin with Oubti meets with the approval of Egyptologists and Assyriologists, the reign of Gudea might perhaps be placed in the interval between the sixth Egyptian dynasty, when the monuments of Pepi seem already to testify to the commercial importance of Coptos,² and the eleventh, when the cities of Upper Egypt obtained political supremacy. No one of course will dream of bringing the reign of Gudea down to a later date.

How must we explain the fact that the last princes of Shirpurla contented themselves with the title of "patesi," while the most ancient took that of "king"? I believe that it is difficult not to see in this fact an indication of the loss of its earlier independence on
________
considers it to form part of the delta which has accumulated at the mouth of the Euphrates. Ed.
1 This is the opinion long ago maintained by Messrs. Lenormant, Oppert, and Sayce. M. Delattre has ably defended it in the memoir L'Asie occidental dans les Inscriptions Assyriennes, pp. 149 seq,
2 See Maspero: Histoire ancienne (4th edit.), p. 81.

{p.54}

the part of Shirpurla and of its subjection to some other city, probably Ur. All the other instances we have of the use of the title of "patesi," lend it the sense of "lieutenant" before the name of a country, of "vicar" before a divine name. 1 We possess inscriptions in which the patesis of Nipur and. of Ishkun-Sin acknowledge their dependency on the kings of Ur. Nebuchadnezzar II calls himself the patesi of the god Merodach, Sargon the patesi of the god Assur. The title of the earliest sovereigns of Assyria, "patesi of the god Assur," defines their power as being that either of a kingdom predominantly religious, or of a viceroyalty under a suzerain, who was without doubt Babylonian. It always implies the idea of lieutenant or dependant. Why should we admit an exception in the case of Shirpurla? It is true that Gudea comes before us as a powerful prince. In one of his inscriptions (statue B) he boasts of having overthrown the city of Anshan in the land of Elam. But for aught we know he may have made this expedition in the company of his suzerain. Dependence, moreover, admits of degrees, and it can even be purely nominal. France has known powerful vassals who have resisted royalty.

III. The campaign of Gudea in Elam, in the course of which the city of Anshan was captured, is the only fact of military history of which we know. We have a little better information, thanks to two inscriptions
______
1 [I should rather render it "High-Priest." See my Lectures on the Religion of the Ancient Babylonians, pp. 59-60.]

{p.55}

of the same patesi (those of statue B and cylinder A), concerning the commercial relations of his country. Unfortunately it is always very difficult to identify the geographical names recorded in the texts.

From a passage cited above it appears that Shir-purla enjoyed commercial intercourse with the countries of Nituk, Gubi or Gubin, Magan, and Melughgha. These four countries furnished Chaldea with wood for building. But Melughgha also furnished gold, and Magan a hard stone, diorite, which was employed by the sculptors. Chaldea was also in connection with the country of Martu, that is to say, with Phoenicia and Syria. From a mountain which seems to have been Amanus, it derived cedars and other trees; from two other mountains of Martu Susalla¹ and Tidanum: two species of stones. It is stones again that were imported from a mountain of Barsip, which I should look for in the neighbourhood of the Syrian city of Til-Barsip. For I believe that it is the same country as that which appears in W. A. I., ii. 53, a 3, under the varying forms of Barsip-ki and Bursip-ki. We know that the name of Til-Barsip was also written Til-Bursip. The inscription of statue B, moreover, tells us that the stones coming from Barsip were conveyed in vessels which, according to my view, would have had only to descend the Euphrates. I am greatly tempted to ascend still farther to the north, towards the sources of this river, in order to find two other coun-
_______
1 The reading Susalla is uncertain. Dr. Hommel has compared Tidanum with Tidnu, the Sumerian equivalent of Akharru (the Semitic term for Syria).

{p.56}

tries the city of Ursu-ki, in the mountains of Ibla (or rather, Tilla¹), which furnished wood, and Shamalum, or Shamanum, in the mountains of Menua, which furnished stones. But I can suggest nothing in regard to three other geographical names which I shall confine myself to mentioning: the mountain of Ghaghum, from whence Gudea procured gold; the city of Abullat or Abulla-Abishu ("the great gate of his fathers"), situated in the mountains of Ki-mash,² whence he procured copper; and the country or city of Madga, in the mountains of the river Gurruda (?),³ from whence he procured a product whose precise nature I am unable to determine.

Certain cities of Babylonia are mentioned in our texts. They are the three ancient cities of Eridu (Nnn-ki), Larrak (Barbar-ki), and the unknown city of Kinunir-ki. They always appear to figure as sacred cities, and the last of the three only after the name of a goddess, Duzi-abzu, "the mistress of Kinunir."

The names of the Euphrates and Tigris frequently occur on the two cylinders of Gudea. I believe I have also found in them the names of Shumer and Accad "Kiengi" and "Ki-burbur." But it is not
_______
1 Dr. Hommel has proposed to read Dalla.
2 [Ki-mash seems to be "the country of Mas," or Arabia Petrea; comp. the Mash of Genesis x. 23. The Babylonians derived a name for "copper," kemassu, from its Sumerian appellation. Ed.]
3 Can the river Gurruda have been the Dead Sea, and can the product derived from the neighbouring district have been bitumen, as Dr. Hommel has conjectured? It is not probable that all the bitumen required for the buildings of Babylonia was exclusively provided by the little river of Hit. (See Hdt. 1. 179.)

{p.57}

yet possible for me to translate the passages where they are found.

The inscription of statue B mentions two seas. "After he had caused the temple of Nin-girsu to be built, Nin-girsu, the lord beloved by him, has forcibly opened for him the roads from the sea of the highlands to the lower sea." The "sea of the highlands " is evidently the Persian Gulf, and it is impossible to doubt that by the "lower sea" is intended the Mediterranean.

IV. For a knowledge of the pantheon of Shirpurla-ki we possess a document of a very great value. This is the list of divinities at the commencement of the imprecatory formula in the inscription on statue B of Gudea. The following are the names of the divinities, which it is important to give in the order, evidently sacred, in which they are enumerated in the inscription:

Anna, the Sky-god, the Ami of the Semites; Ellilla or Bel, "the lord of the mountain of the world,"¹ where the seat of the gods was placed, as well as the habitation of the dead, also called "the father of the gods;" Nin-gharsag or Belit, "the mistress of the mountain," the wife of Ellilla, and mother of the gods; En-ki or Ea, "the lord of the earth" and the waters; En-zu, or Sin, the Moon-god, the eldest son of Ellilla; Nin-girsu or Ninib, the Chaldean Hercules, the son and warrior of Ellilla; Nina, the daughter of Ea, who has the same titles as Nin-dara, and may
_______
1 In an abbreviated form, "the lord of the world."

{p.58}

therefore be regarded as the consort of this god; Nin-dara, who is the god Ninib¹ under another name; Gatumdug, the daughter of Anna, who is the goddess Bau under another name; Bau, daughter of Anna and wife of Nin-girsu; Ninni or Nana, the Ishtar of the Semites, another daughter of Anna; Shamash, the Sun-god, the son of En-ki or Ea; Pasagga, the Ishum of the Semites, who is undoubtedly only another form of Gibil, the Fire-god, the son of En-ki or Ea;

Gal-alim, the son of Nin-girsu; Dun-shagana, another son of Nin-girsu; Nin-mar-ki, the eldest daughter of Nina; Duzi-abzu, "lady of Kinunir-ki;" Nin-gish-zida, the god of Gudea.

It will be observed that this list arranges the divinities in three generations. In the first come the four great gods, including a goddess, distinguished also by the later Assyro-Babylonian religious systems, and from whom all the other gods proceed. Next are placed the sons and daughters of these deities. Lastly come the grandchildren. I have been obliged to put Duzi-abzu and Nin-gish-zida by themselves, since no text has as yet given us any information con cerning them.² But we may believe that one of them Nin-gish-zida must be mentioned at the end of the
_______
1 [Or Uras. Ed.]
2 If our Duzi-abzu is a goddess and her title of "lady of Kinunir-ki" does not allow us to doubt it it is clear that we cannot identify her with the god Duzi-abzu who is named in W. A. I., ii. 56, 33-38, as one of the six sons of Ea. It is necessary to understand six sons in this passage, and not six children, since the following line names "a daughter" of Ea.

{p.59}

list, whatever may have been his rank in the divine-family, since, as we shall see, he was the special deity of Gudea and his intercessor with the other gods.

The preceding list does not give all the gods mentioned in the texts of Telloh; some even are absent who had their temples in Shirpurla. Without pretending to be complete, I may further enumerate the god Nin-agal, who is only another form of En-ki; the god Shidlamta-ena, another name of Nin-girsu, and the Nergal of the Semites; the god Nin-sar, yet another name of Nergal; the goddess Nin-tn, another designation of Nin-gharsag; the god Uru-ki or Sin; the god Nirba; perhaps the god Nin-shagh, Pap-sukal; a god called the "king" of Gishgalla-ki; a goddess "O Ku-anna; a god Dun-sir (?)-anna; seven sons of Bau, who are termed Zazaru (or Zazauru), Im-ghud-ena, Ur-un-ta-ena (or Gim-nun-ta-ena), Ghi-gir-nunna, Ghi-shaga, Gurmu, and Zarmu.

In a learned article in the Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie (ii. pp. 179 seq,) Prof. Tiele has shown that at Babylon, by the side of the local god Bel-Merodach and even in his temple of E-shagil, his wife and son Zarpanit and Nebo were also adored; that at Borsippa, by the side of the supreme god Nebo and in his temple of L-Zida, his consort Nan a was worshipped. If we remember that other temples existed at Babylon dedicated to various other deities, we shall readily admit that the cult rendered to these gods was offered by reason of their being the mother, the brothers, or the sisters of the principal divinity. We {p.60} may remark, moreover, that the supreme god of the national or local pantheon was hardly ever one of the primordial deities. The latter, indeed, appear to me to have been born after their sons, in consequence of the need experienced by the mind of man to establish for his god a family analogous to his own, with parents, wife, and children. The two exceptions which may be instanced from Nipur and Eridu are not certain. Dr. Hommel has remarked that one text at all events names Ninib and not Bel as the chief divinity of Nipur. As for Eridu, I do not feel sure that the principal deity there was really Ea. This god had certainly a temple in Eridu, just as he had at Shirpurla-ki, but in both cities it was under the title of the divine father that he was adored. The very interesting inscription on a brick of a patesi of Eridu, named Idadu, which is unfortunately still unpublished, would lead us to suppose that the chief god of the place was Nin-Eridu, possibly a name of Merodach.¹

The supreme god of Shirpurla was Nin-girsu, whose consort was the goddess Bau. Both were worshipped under different titles. Besides the temples in which he was invoked as Nin-girsu, he had others in Girsu-ki, where he was known as Nin-dara and Shidlamta-ena. Similarly the goddess was not only adored as Bau, but she was also worshipped in Uru-azagga as Gatumdug and in Nina-ki as Nina. Three at least of the parent gods had sanctuaries in Shir-
______
1 See George Smith in the Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 1. p. 32.

{p.61} purla, Ellilla (called specially "the father of Nin-girsu"), En-ki, and "the mother of the gods," Nin-gharsag. Temples were even dedicated to En-ki under his two titles of En-ki and Nin-agal. We may question whether it was in virtue of her being his wife or his sister that Ninni possessed a temple in Girsu-ki and another in Gishgalla-ki; and also whether Nin-gish-zida, in his special temple at Girsu-ki, was worshipped as being a brother of the god or as being the god himself under a fourth manifestation. It is certain, on the other hand, that Gal-alim and Dun-shagana had each a temple bec