The civilization of Babylonia and Assyria

Its remains, language, history, religion, commerce, law, art, and literature

by Morris Jastrow | 1915 | 168,585 words

This work attempts to present a study of the unprecedented civilizations that flourished in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley many thousands of years ago. Spreading northward into present-day Turkey and Iran, the land known by the Greeks as Mesopotamia flourished until just before the Christian era....

With the temporary eclipse of the power of the Semites, the old-time rivalry between the Sumerian states, which we have seen was typical of conditions prevailing until the days of Lugalzaggisi, again sets in.

Ur which had been forced to play a secondary role in the combination with Uruk reasserts itself, and about thirty years after Utuchegal's accession Urengur succeeds (c. 2450 B.C.) in making Ur once more the capital of a united Sumerian kingdom. For 117 years this dynasty maintained itself and the orderly succession of its five rulers from father to son Urengur, Dungi, Pursin, Gimilsin and Ibisin bears witness to the tranquil conditions which these rulers established.

The same testimony is borne by the large number of business documents [1] that we have of this period which give evidence of an extensive commercial activity that goes hand in hand with political stability, while the dates attached to these documents, the years being still marked in this period by important events, [2] likewise show that the rulers were able to devote themselves chiefly to works of peace, such as the rebuilding of walls or of temples to the chief deities in a variety of centres, Nippur, Eridu, Uruk, Larsa, Lagash and above all in Ur, and in otherwise improving and embellishing these and other cities and towns.

Occasionally Elam to the east gives the rulers of Ur trouble, but far more serious was the menace from the distant north. Dungi, the second ruler of the dynasty, undertakes no less than nine campaigns against the land of Sumuru and Lulubi. These groups show the same resistance to a foreign yoke that formerly characterized the Guti, of whom we hear nothing during the period of the Ur dynasty and who, while unable to stand up against better disciplined forces, rebelled again and again as the opportunity offered.

We do not as yet know the circumstances as a consequence of which the Ur dynasty came to an end, through the capture of its last representative, Ibisin, by the Elamites, c. 2330 B.C. Presumably, a combination of various centres was formed which did not hesitate to call in the assistance of the common enemy to the east. Between the dynasty of Akkad and that of Ur, Elam had enjoyed a short era of independence during which one of her rulers, Basha-Shushinak, actually lays claim to the control of the "four quarters".

It is not impossible that the Elamites were aided by Semites, whose influence, at all events, must have been considerable in this district, for we find the rulers using Akkadian instead of their own language in official inscriptions, and for a number of centuries business documents are also couched in Akkadian, though about the middle of the second millennium before this era a reaction sets in which leads to the reintroduction of the Elamite speech. Towards the close of the Ur dynasty there are indications of a reassertion of power in Elam which led to open hostilities and the overthrow of the Ur dynasty.

In place of the latter centre, we find Isin the seat of a dynasty which maintained itself for 225 years (c. 2350-2125 B.C.), though its rulers content themselves with the title of "King of Sumer and Akkad" and were unable to prevent the simultaneous rise of an independent, smaller monarchy in Larsa which outlived that of Isin and whose rulers maintained themselves till 2090 B.C., when its last representative, Rim-Sin, was forced to yield to the great conqueror Hammurapi. [3]

The kings of Larsa also exercised control over Ur, sometimes designating themselves as kings of Ur, but more frequently as patrons. These rival dynasties of Isin and Larsa must often have been in conflict with each other, but unfortunately the century and a half following the overthrow of Ur is one for which few historical documents have as yet been found.

Uruk also appears to have had t a number of independent rulers, until a ruler, Rim-Sin, of Elamitic origin obtains control of Larsa, and thence as a centre both overthrows Uruk and puts an end to the Isin dynasty. The period was therefore one in which the centralizing tendency of former days was considerably weakened and a gradual return to the conditions prevailing before the time of Lugalzaggisi is brought about.

The rulers of Isin apart from their inability to retain control of important centres in the Euphrates Valley were menaced chiefly from two sides from the east through the formation of a new Elamitic state in the district of Eamutbal (or Jamutbal), the borderland to the east of the Tigris, and from the north through the rise of an Amorite dynasty which established itself in the city of Babylon c. 2225 B.C., not long after the death of the usurper Amel-Ninib (c. 2256-2228 B.C.), and controlled northern Babylonia.

The formation of an independent Elamitic state on the border between Babylonia and Elam proper is another indication both of the weakness of the Isin dynasty and of the inability of the central Elamitic power with its seat in the capital, Susa, to maintain the integrity of the empire. [4]

From Ashurbanapal's inscriptions we know that he recaptured a statue of the goddess Nana, of Uruk, which he says the Elamites had carried away as a trophy 1635 years ago, [5] which brings us to the year 2280 or, according to a variant, 1535 years, which would be equivalent to 2180. He names as the Elamite ruler who plundered the temples of the Euphrates Valley, Kudurnanchundi, and since we know of a ruler of Emutbal, Kudurmabug, containing the same element, Kudur, it is quite possible that Kudurnanchundi belongs to the Emutbal dynasty rather than to one which reigned in Susa.

Fig. 1 (left), Lugal-Daudu, King of Adab - as type of Sumerian
Fig. 2 (right), Marduk-Nadin-Akhi, King of Babylonia (c. 1140-1086 B.C.) - as type of Semite

If this be so, the lower date is probably the more correct of the two, for shortly after 2180 B.C., we find Kudurmabug as ruler of Emutbal (c. 2150 B.C.) actively interfering in the affairs of the Euphrates Valley; he rescues Larsa out of the hands of a certain Mutiabal and places his own son Aradsin in control. [6]

This date is coequal with the beginning of the reign of the last ruler of the Isin dynasty and we have seen that the last sixty years of this period were marked by internal disturbances. After a reign of twelve years Aradsin is succeeded by his brother, Rim-Sin. During the reign of these two sons of Kudurmabug, Elamitic influences must have been paramount. They no doubt kept close relations with Emutbal, which at this period exercised a sway over the old kingdom of Elam, with its capital at Susa, whose rulers became vassals of the kings of Emutbal.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

See Legrain, L&s Temps des Rois d'Ur (Paris, 1912).

[2]:

The dating of years by the reign of rulers is not introduced until the time of the Cassite dynasty in the eighteenth century. See below, pp. 156 and 351.

[3]:

See below, p. 146

[4]:

See further on the relationship between this central kingdom of Elam and the rulers of Emutbal, Meyer, Geschichte des Alter- tums, I, 2, p. 601-605.

[5]:

Rawlinson, V, PL 6, 107, with parallel passages.

[6]:

See his votive inscription to Nergal published by Thureau-Dangin (Revue d'Assyriologie, IX, pp. 121-124).

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: