CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE 924 087 980 896 Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924087980896 THE HISTORY OF BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA THE HISTORY OF BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA BY HUGO WINCKLER, Ph.D. Professor in the University of Berlin TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY JAMES ALEXANDER CRAIG, Ph.D. Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures in the University of Michigan REVISED BY THE AUTHOR NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS I 907 Copyright, 1907 Bv CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS Published September, 1907 PREFACE BY THE TRANSLATOR AND EDITOR Dr. Winckleb is facile princeps in the field of historical research covered by the following vol- ume. He has not only the great advantages of being one of our foremost Semitic linguists, and a specialist in Assyriology but is also naturally endowed, as few men are, for the constructive work of the historiographer. Perhaps to no one of the present generation of Semitic scholars, more than to him, are the workers in the various fields of Semitic Literature and History indebted. He has been for a quarter of a century not merely a rehearser of verified facts in this new and difficult domain but an indefatigable discoverer of new facts which, with his brilliant historical imagination, he has always known how to illu- minate. It was, therefore, a matter of self -congratula- tion when the present editor secured his consent to revise his GeschicMe in the light of the knowl- edge gained since it was published in 1899 as a contribution to the Weltgeschichte of Dr. H. F. VI PREFACE Helmolt. Not only were important additions made to the work as it was first presented and modifications of many portions thereof intro- duced, but the author has also carefully reviewed the translation and has made use of this opportu- nity to add further corrections to the original text. I have endeavored to give an accurate rendering of the original and, at the same time, a readable English translation, which I hope will not too often betray an unconscious influence of Teutonic modes of thought and expression. Here and there I had introduced a sentence or two of my own, for purposes of further elucidation, without indicating that they were not the author's. To the footnotes I have added I have generally affixed my name. I have not considered it neces- sary to distinguish, as is often done, between the spellings Ashur, the god, and Ashshur, the land, of Assyria. I trust that the historical order followed in this work will be found to justify itself in the use of it. The leading role played by Babylonia in the history of the ancient Orient during the four milleniums of her history, in the field of politics, as well as of culture, not only excuses the plan adopted, but also entitles this ancient land to a treatment of her history apart from that of Assyria, advantageous, from some points of view PREFACE vii as the combined treatment may be. In fact it is only by the method here followed that the student who is not already familiar with the progress of the history of the two states can readily gain a correct understanding of their peculiar character- istics and relative importance in the history of civilization. It is with the earnest hope that this new and revised edition may be found more adequately to meet the wants of that growing body of students in our colleges and theological seminaries who perceive the almost unique importance of this study in relation to our knowledge of the his- tory of civilization, its culture, art, and religion, that the editor has undertaken the work of trans- lation which called for a special knowledge of the subject. Helmolt's entire work, the Weltgeschichte, to which, as above stated, the present volume in its original form was contributed, was published in English some years ago by Wm. Heinemann in London under the title "The World's History," and by Dodd, Mead & Co. in this country, with the consent of both of whom this work is published. James A. Ckaig. University of Michigan, June, 1906. CONTENTS BABYLONIA CHAPTER I PAGE The Region of Western-Asiatic Civilization . 3 CHAPTER II The Sumerians ....... 12 CHAPTER III The Earliest Immigrations of Semites . . 18 CHAPTER IV The Babylonian Kingdom — The Earliest .Times 27 CHAPTER V Kings and Patesis op Lagash . . . .41 CHAPTER VI The Kings of Ur, Isin, Larsa . . . .51 CHAPTER VII The First Dynasty of Babylon — "Canaanite" 56 CONTENTS CHAPTER VIII The Second Dynasty of Babylon— The Sea- Land . 66 CHAPTER IX The Third Dynasty of Babylon— The Kassites 71 CHAPTER X The Dynasty of Pashe CHAPTER XI The Elamites as Rulers of Babylon The Dynasty of Bazi 93 97 98 CHAPTER XII The Chaldeans 100 CHAPTER XIII Baby'lonia under the New Assyrian Empire 113 CHAPTER XIV Historical Retrospect and Outlook a. The Sources .... . 127 b. The Land in its Original State . 131 c. Irrigation ..... . 135 d. The Arts . 139 e. ReUgion and Science . 142 /. Commerce, Business, Industry . 160 CONTENTS xi ASSYEIA CHAPTER I PAGE The Mesopotamian Period . . . .167 CHAPTER II The Kings of Mitani 172 CHAPTER III The Rise of the Land of Ashur . . . 177 CHAPTER IV The Old Assyrian Empire a. Its Rise 188 b. The Second Advance of Assyria . . . 197 c. The Aramaean Immigration . . . 206 CHAPTER V The Middle Assyrian Kingdom .... 209 CHAPTER VI The New Assyrian Kingdom : Assyria the Paramount Power in Western Asia . . 237 CHAPTER VII The Decline 259 CHAPTER VIII The Fall 281 CHAPTER IX The Civilization of Assyria .... 286 xii CONTENTS THE NEW BABYLONIAN-CHALDEAN KINGDOM CHAPTER I PAQE Nebuchadrezzar . . . . • .313 CHAPTER II The Relation of the New Babylonian Kingdom TO Media . 319 CHAPTER III The Fall of New Babylonia through the Persians ....... 324 INDEX 329 I-BABYLONIA BABYLONIA CHAPTER I THE REGION OF WESTERN-ASIATIC CIVILIZATION Of the two civilizations which sprang up almost contemporaneously with one another, the one in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates, the other in the alluvial lands of the Nile, the Babylonian unquestionably exercised the greater influence. The culture of Greece owed much to Babylonia, and European civilization became, in turn, heir to her achievements through the Greeks. It is fet possible to discover all the lines of com- jation along which the thought of the East d over in historic times to the mainland of Greece. It is still less possible to determine the prehistoric paths by which Babylonian ideas reached European nations and others beyond the bounds of Babylonian empire. Nevertheless, it is sufficient to point to the single word fiva (the Babylonian mana, or weight of sixty shekels) as presumptive evidence of an influence that was far- reaching. The timepieces that we carry in our pockets, and place upon our mantels, are constant witnesses to the scientific influence of Babylonia. 3 4 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA The faces of our watches are divided into twelve periods corresponding to the old Babylonian divi- sion of the day into twelve double hours (kasbu). It was from this kasbu that the mile, as a measure of distance, was derived, the old mile represent- ing the space traversed in two hours. The routes by which these products of ancient Semitic thought were transferred to the "West lie, at pres- ent, quite beyond the bounds of our vision, but the agreement that exists, even in matters of detail, between the Babylonian mythology and that of the ancient Germans, and other peoples as well, precludes the possibility of their independent development. "The common endowment of the race" is an hypothesis that fails utterly to account not only for the main features in which these mythologies are agreed, but also, and,jjjj|j^ especially, for the evident accord in unim]gf| particulars. The decipherment of the cuneiform inscriptions and the hieroglyphs of Egypt has extended our historical knowledge of Western civilization to a period almost twice as remote as that previously known. The history of Greece was known to us from the seventh or eighth century b.c. The oldest records of Babylonia and Egypt have lifted the veil that shrouded the centuries of the fourth millenium before our era. The period that sepa- rates their authors from that of Lycurgus and WESTERN-ASIATIC CIVILIZATION 5 the foundation of Rome is, consequently, as long as that which lies between us and the historical beginnings of Hellenic life. Babylonian civilization and history was not confined to the region watered by the Tigris and Euphrates. A civilization so advanced as that of Babylonia could not exist without attracting to itself the assistance of neighboring lands and carrying thither its own achievements. Thus we see, even in remote antiquity, Babylon reaching out toward Palestine, Armenia, Elam, and even to Arabia. Her merchants went forth in the pur- suits of commerce, her soldiers to war and vic- tory. The products of her artists and artisans were laid in foreign markets. Her superfluous ■ found homes on alien soil. There, hey were often exposed to attack from neighbors and often succumbed to their umbers. Generally speaking, therefore, the history of the outlying countries and peoples is vitally connected with the history of Babylonia. It is no mere accident that we possess little or no knowledge of these peoples beyond that which has come to us from the Babylonians. The gaze of all these outlying peoples, and the direction of their movement, was toward the old culture- land, and that irrespective of the existing rela- tion, whether ruled by the latter or imposing their rule upon it. Emphatic testimony is given to 6 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA this fact in the extensive spread of the cuneiform writing, the pre-eminent achievement of the Baby- lonian intellect. Throughout the whole of West- ern Asia it became the medium of intellectual exchange. Everywhere, so far as we are at present able to see, we discover it. It was used in Elam, in Armenia, and even in Asia Minor, the home of the Hittite script, which still remains undeciphered. The peoples of Palestine were familiar with it, and through it with the Baby- lonian language and thought. It was studied at the court of the Pharaohs, and in the fifteenth century b.c. it was the medium of diplomatic and political correspondence between Egypt and the states of Western Asia. Inasmuch, then, as the development o^ Ionia conditioned the historical and cuj vance and political character of West the task of presenting its history is mal especially so when this history is to deal with a civilization extending over three thousand years, developing in the midst of barbarian neighbors, and subject to the most varied succession of incur- sions from without. Babylonian civilization was not confined to a single people — on the contrary, it was enjoyed and transmitted by peoples, of different homes and blood, who entered in succes- sion the great plain of the Tigris and Euphrates and there, under the influence of its dominant cul- WESTERN-ASIATIC CIVILIZATION 7 ture, started upon a fresh career. The same was true of the neighboring lands which felt in a measure the effects of this civilization, though with regard to these our knowledge is much more defective owing to the scantiness of our material. Just as the great civilizations have developed along the great natural highways of communica- tion, the great rivers, so the great movements of * peoples originate in the treeless plains which afford grazing for the herds by which man lives in the nomad stage. But great though the extent of this territory may be, to which the nomad lays claim, it is, never- theless, able to yield support to only a compara- tively small population. As the people multiply they are compelled to seek fresh fields for support, ^d naturally the simple, vigorous sons of nature ^1 enticed by the attractions of civilization and the hope of easy victory over men who through the seductions of refinement have lost in virility. As regards Babylonia there were three of these original centres which contributed to its popula- tion: the steppes of Europe, whence migrations took place over the Caucasus, around the Caspian Sea, or to the west through Asia Minor; the steppes of Central Asia to the northeast; south and southwest Arabia. Of these three regions the first is of minor importance owing to the unfavorable conditions 8 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA for numerical growth; the second, Central Asia, occupies a more important place. This, however, was true of both these centres: every wave of migration which went out from them toward Babylonia struck first upon the border states that stood under Babylonian influence, viz.: those of Asia Minor, where the Hittites had developed their pecuHar life, and those of Syria, Armenia, and Elam. Babylonia was consequently pro- tected, in a measure, by these buffer-states from incursions from both of these quarters. On the south and southwest it was different. Arabia, with its extended steppes, touched immediately upon Babylonia, and Arabia from time imme- morial was the home of nomad tribes possessed of overmastering predatory instincts. The only natural boundary between the two lands was tj^ Euphrates River. The roving nomad could swe^ over the plain and skirt the cities on the west bank unhindered; that, too, even when a sturdy arm checked his passage to the rich pasturage on the east. The boundary which the Babylonians were compelled to defend was an extended one, and ran in parts through dreary wastes. It rarely happened, therefore, in olden days, any more than now, that the rulers of Babylonia were able to command a sufficient force to repel the impetuous rush of nomads and prevent them crossing the river. It was from this quarter that the old home- WESTERN-ASIATIC CIVILIZATION 9 land of culture was exposed to the most frequent and permanent incursions, each, in turn, to spoil its predecessor of its title to sovereignty over the fertile plain. So far as our knowledge reaches, Arabia is the home of that family of people which, on linguistic grounds, we designate as Semitic. The history of Babylonia is, there- fore, for the most part Semitic ; the history of its neighboring peoples, so far as they were subject to her influence, is also Semitic. In so far as it was modified otherwise from without we must look to the other two main regions already referred to as the centres whence the influence proceeded. It was in Babylonia that the Semites achieved their greatest attainments. There they developed all that their natural endowments under the given conditions could effect; there Semitic history, so far as it is a history of civilized people, discovers its field of movement. Even Islamism has its proper seat there, but we can no more speak of a Semitic-Islamic civilization, indeed even less, than of a Babylonian-Semitic: the Arabs succeeded by virtue of the Persian-Byzan- tine culture. The actors in Babylonian history, so far as it falls within our vision, are Semites. Their speech was preponderatingly Semitic despite the non- Semitic elements of admixture in the population. But our historical knowledge, it need not be 10 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA stated, does not reacli back to the beginnings of Babylonian civilization. History begins witb written tradition. Written tradition, however, presupposes a long period of development during which the transition is made, on the one hand, from the first crude efforts to body forth an idea in written form to the achievement of a service- able script, and, on the other hand, from inco- ordinated efforts in thought to the development of the reasoning powers. These stages must have been left behind before events could be handed down by written records. It is a long step from the pictographs of savages to written narratives of wars and records of temple-building, such as we find in old Babylonian inscriptions of the fourth millenium B.C., and to the records of admin- istration drawn up in systematic form during the same period. Possibly the peoples who sur- mounted the difficulties of the early stages labored longer to accomplish their tasks than the three or four thousand years through which we can follow the cuneiform script in its use and development. We shall see that the oldest documents, at present known to us, are of Semitic origin — the work of Semites who came into Babylonia from without and, through war with one another, united in forming greater states. These records, however, show distinctly the influence of the old civilized stock that was in possession of the country prior WESTERN-ASIATIC CIVILIZATION 11 to the Semites. It is to them, therefore, we must ascribe the origin of Babylonian culture and the invention of the cuneiform writing — for us they are one people, for we see them only through the veil of prehistoric time. Of their rise, growth, and fortunes, which must have been as varied and changing as those of the Semites of Babylonia, whose history fills the next three thousand years, we know nothing. CHAPTER II THE SUMERIANS The oldest records we have are written in a non- Semitic language — "the language of the Sumeri- ans," as they are called in the later texts. This language is all that we know of this ancient people, the inventors of the cuneiform writing and the originators of Babylonian culture. This, however, is the weightiest and most convincing testimony to their importance. For, long after Sume- rian ceased to be a spoken language, when the most varied peoples had settled in the Babylonian plain and had passed again in turn from the stage of its history, as the old Sumerians themselves had; when the roles of the different Semitic peo- ples were ended, when Persians, Macedonians, and Parthians still ruled there — almost to the begin- ning of the Christian era — the Sumerian language continued to be cultivated in Babylonia in con- nection with the sacred cult. It enjoyed there the dignity accorded to Latin as the tongue of the learned and of the church in the Middle Ages and in more modern times, and maintained itself in this role for a period more than twice as long. If then, up to the present, no Sumerian speaks 12 THE SUMERIANS 13 to us out of his own inscription, if the past of this remarkable people belongs to the prehistoric age, though its final achievements descend in an uninterrupted chain of tradition into our own time and civilization, it, nevertheless, comes nearer to us in the preservation of its speech than it could have done by any other of its intellectual feats. Inscriptions and religious texts in the Sumerian language have descended to us from the fourth millenium b.c. The oldest of these inscrip- tions are those of the kings of Lagash. But, in addition to these, other inscriptions in Semitic- Babylonian language have come down to us from their immediate predecessors, contemporaries, and successors. These are written by Semites, and as we shall see later, by Semites who conse- quently form, so to speak, a second layer of the population. We must assume that about the end of the fourth millenium the Sumerian speech had wholly, or almost wholly, disappeared from vul- gar use, and at this time played practically the same role as Latin at the time of the Merovingians. We can readily comprehend how the language, maintained only by artificial means in the succeed- ing centuries, should have suffered a fate similar to that of Latin in the Middle Ages. A rejuvena- tion through the evolution of classic ideas, such as came to the Latin with the Renaissance, was foreign to the Oriental mind. Sumerian, and its 14 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA idiom known as Akkadian, suffered constant deterioration in later times. Semiticisms were freely incorporated. The later the texts the stronger is the impression that they are composed of shortened and inflected Sumerian expressions by rejecting the original and totally different syntax. This Sumerian exhibits the same charac- teristics as the Monks-Latin, and even those of the macaronic compositions, though, in the latter case, the linguistic hybridations were often humorously meant, whereas this mongrel Sumerian was al- ways serious. It will be readily understood that we are but imperfectly acquainted with the proper pronunciation of this old language when it is fur- ther borne in mind that the older the texts the greater is the number of ideographs employed in them. These ideographs, or symbols, though they suggest the meaning of the word, or expression, do not tell us how the latter was read. While, therefore, the meaning of the old inscriptions can be made out with at least approximate, if not always absolute, certainty through our knowledge of the meaning of the signs, the pronunciation, in so far as it is discoverable, depends upon the information supplied by the scribes of later centuries. Notwithstanding the fact that we are in posses- sion of numerous texts there remains much in connection with the language that is still unknown THE SUMERIANS 15 or obscure. Enough, however, is established to enable us to comprehend in a general way the character of the Sumerian, the oldest language of civilization. It is agglutinative, in structure essentially like the Turkish, and consequently wholly unlike the Semitic. The following sen- tence may serve as an illustration: e.gal Ur-gur ungal Ur gal e-An-na in-ru-a-ka-ta= palace + Ur - gur + king +Ur+ man + e-Anna+ he built + genitive particle +in= in the palace of Urgur, the king of Ur, the builder of (the temple) E-anna. The genitive relation, which, in English, is expressed by "of" between palace and Urgur, and appears in the same place in Semitic languages, is here thrown to the end, where it is expressed by ka. The whole sentence is, therefore, somewhat after the manner of Ger- man word-formations, a kind of compositum. In the same way, the preposition "in," which is so important for us, since it designates the place and, therefore, stands at the beginning, is here found last of all {ta). We may note further the expres- sion of the Semitic participle by the circumlocu- tion gal . . . in-ru-a=man . . . +he built. The effort to establish a relationship between this language and any of the ancient tongues, even of the different ones spoken by surrounding peoples, or those of the present day, must be renounced. What has already been said with respect to its 16 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA prominciation is in itself suggestive here. Pho- netic decay had already reached an advanced stage. The majority of words consist of only simple syllables with a vowel and consonant, or of one compound syllable, a consonant, vowel and consonant; but most of the latter have lost the final consonant, becoming thus open syllables. Moreover, a large number of words which were originally different are phonetically indistinguish- able. The Sumerian language has, therefore, undergone a similar process of detrition to that found in the Chinese. The question of the lin- guistic relationship of the Sumerian to the lan- guages of other peoples is a very enticing one for the linguist. But at present we know far too little of the structure and vocabulary of this tongue to anticipate much success for investigations of this problem. It is easy enough to pose it, but it is almost impossible to solve it so long as we remain ignorant of the history of the people who spoke it. Moreover, a literature in which thought is prevailingly expressed by suggesting ideas (or by a succession of signs representing ideas), and not by sounds, fails to supply the primary data necessary to the determination of the development of a language phonetically. Future investigations are as likely to fail of important results in set- tling the precise linguistic relationship of this old speech as have those hitherto attempted. THE SUMERIANS 17 Of the history of the Sumerians we know noth- ing. The same is true of early Egyptian life. In the first historical period of the Old Kingdom, when the Semites appeared in Babylonia, civili- zation was fully developed ; but scarcely anything is known from the inscriptions of the earlier times when civilization was in its infancy and youth. We may nevertheless, by looking to later times, and allowing ourselves to be guided by the analogy of similar conditions, draw at least one conclusion with reasonable certainty — the devel- opment of these civilizations was not realized in an idyllic age on the fruitful banks of the Euphrates and Nile. Foes and friends met together. The same relationships as we find among the peoples of both lands in later ages, such as are found among all civilized peoples between whom communication is not prev-ented by insurmountable barriers, must have existed in the gray dawn and early development of Sumerian history. Then, too, trade had its movements hither and thither, kings must have exchanged letters, and clashed in arms, and one people bowed subject to another's yoke. CHAPTER III THE EARLIEST IMMIGRATIONS OF SEMITES As soon as the darkness of the distant past is illumined by the light shed from historical in- scriptions, the oldest monuments which speak to us directly, not by way of inference, show us Semites settled in the plain of the Tigris and Euphrates, where they have already won the mastery and exercise lordship. The name Sem- ites is now commonly employed to designate that family of people which speaks the same language as the Hebrews, who, in the genealogical table of Genesis X. are counted with the descendants of Shem. It is puerile to point to the correctness of this table for a justification of this designation, or to its errors, to prove its unfitness. The prin- ciples which guided the biblical compiler were by no means those of the nineteenth century with its emphasis upon language. Even language is very defective and much overrated as a means for the determination of racial origins and connections; but insufficient as it is, it was little considered in the ancient Orient. Lately, however, it has been discovered that Blam, the first mentioned 18 EARLIEST IMMIGRATIONS OF SEMITES 19 son of Shem (x., 22), which hitherto has been regarded as erroneously classed with the Semites, not only used the cuneiform script but also wrote a form of Babylonian similar to that employed in Canaan. Unexpectedly, too, our discoveries show this to have been the case in the age of the first Babylonian rulers of whom we know. The French excavations in Susa have also shown that Susa and Blam were then considered to belong to Babylonia, and that it was not until later that the "Elamite" language was used in writing. The genealogical table is, therefore, correct as regards Elam if we read it as the writer intended it. That it should have put Lud, i.e., Lydia, before Aram excites surprise, and the opinion is unanimous that we have a scribal error here. Besides Arpakshad, the best suggestion is that Lullu ought to be read. LuUu was the name of the border land between Assyria and Babylonia and Media. The proposal made by Jensen to read Lubdi for Lud {-oh for yh) is less worthy of attention, as this name, so far as we know, was given only to a region situate between northern Mesopotamia and Armenia. It is, nevertheless, possible that it was once employed more com- prehensively to designate the northern part of the Babylonian territory of Armenia. The home of the Semites was Arabia. The consideration of any other centre is excluded on 20 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA geographical grounds. Up to the present day the purest Semites are to be found in Arabia. There, under similar conditions, they live on the same plane of development as their tribal relations who in the fourth millenium won for themselves the fertile and cultivated lands of Babylonia. The eyes of the descendants still look longingly in the same direction despite the gloomy contrast be- tween its present impoverishment and neglect and the richness and cultivation of the ancient days. The only routes along which the nomad tribes of Arabia could migrate led toward Syria and Palestine. The ocean set bounds to their move- ments in other directions. Migrations westward or eastward would presuppose the use of ships, and this a transition from the nomadic life of the desert to settled homes. The fisherman, at least, must needs have pitched his tent, but large num- bers are never nourished by the fisherman's craft. From South Arabia, therefore, no exodus of importance occurred. It was only when the Sabseans, and the peoples united with them, had developed a semi-civilization of their own that settlers crossed over from South Arabia into Abyssinia and Africa, and of this movement very Qittle is known. We are able to determine, approximately at least, the course and the time of these migrations since we have a fairly accurate knowledge of the EARLIEST IMMIGRATIONS OF SEMITES 21 beginning and end of the last of them and a corresponding certainty with regard to the first. Tliey are the natural result of overpopulation. They must, consequently, recur with a certain periodicity under similar conditions of life and society. This a priori consideration is amply sup- ported by the inscriptions. We have definite knowledge of four main Semitic migrations north- ward. The last, the Arabian, we may take first, as it stands in the clearer light of later history, and culminated in the conquests of Islam. It began about the seventh or eighth century b.c, when the influx of Arabs into Syria is known to have taken place. This was preceded by the Aramaic, the beginning of which we can also ■ approximately discover. As early as the fifteenth to the thirteenth century we find Mesopotamia overrun by Aramaic nomads. The first advances of these tribes must have antedated this period. Prior to the Aramaic was the Canaanitic-Hebraic (Amorite). If, in view of what has been said, we allow in round numbers a thousand years between these great movements we shall arrive at a date for this latter one which is supported by the monuments. About 2400 to 2100 b.c. we find that Western Asia, Babylonia, Egypt likewise, are in possession of a people best described as Canaan- ite. Another thousand years, or more, earlier than this the Babylonian Semites have entered 22 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA into the full inheritance of the old Snmerian civilization. These are the four great groups of Semitic peoples whose successive movements most vitally affected the history of Western Asia. One must bear in mind, however, that computations such as the above are only approximate — the estimate may be a century too high or too low for any, or all, of the groups. To set definite limits to any great migration, however tempting, is manifestly impossible. In all such movements of great masses one people is driven before another, and the last part of a group is still on the move when the first contingent of the next takes up the march, as, for example, in the case of the Hebrews- and Aramasans about the middle of the second millenium b.o. THE PRINCIPAL CITIES It is to be supposed that the Semites who entered Babylonia found there on arrival a highly developed civilization. This they accepted, and possessed themselves of the superior advantages which it offered as barbarians always do in simi- lar circumstances. Our earliest sources make mention of a number of cities whose gods and their worship were held in high reverence. Cen- trally situated at the converging points of the great highways they remained throughout the EARLIEST IMMIGRATIONS OF SEMITES 23 course of history marts of business and fosterers of culture. The majority of them were pre-Sem- itic settlements, which were completely Semitized on the arrival of the Semitic nomad wanderers. To us they are Semitic cities, just as Cologne and Augsburg are German. The most important of these cities lying along the Euphrates, beginning with the most southerly, are Eridu (Abu Shahrein), the seat of the wor- ship of Ea, the god who bestowed upon man all the elements of civilization; Ur {Mugheir), where Sin, the moon-god, was worshipped in southern Babylonia; Lagash (or Sir-pur-la, as the ideo- gram is read phonetically). The modern Telloh represents the ancient site. It was here the French consul De Sarzec made his important dis- coveries. There is also a city whose site is not yet known, and whose name, written ideographic- ally, is not yet read, but from whose rulers several inscriptions have come down to us. Since the second sign in the name was erroneously con- nected with the sign for how^ [Ban) the name ' Vid. Hilprecht, Old Bab. Inscriptions, Pt. II., pp. 51-56, where the author, owing to this erroneous identification, reads gish Ban hi and then connects it with Harran because of Albiruni's state- ment that Harran was crescent in form, and in view of Sachau's sketch. Radau, Early Bab. History, and others, have read Gish- Uh(?) and identified it with the modem Djokha. Its territory ad- joined that of Lagaah with which it came into frequent conflict over the state boundary. Finally the delimitation was effected by means of a canal, which was constructed from the Euphrates to the sacred territory of Nin-girses, the god of Lagash. — Craig. 24 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA *' Bow-city" was given to it. But the sign is rather the one which later represented the war chariot and it might, therefore, more correctly be called the city of the War Chariot; I sin (for- merly read Nisin and also Pashe), likewise yet undiscovered, in later times the seat of a Baby- lonian dynasty; Larsa (Senkereh), the seat of the southern Babylonian sun-worship; Nippur (Nuf- far), the city of the god Bel, where the Americans have excavated with so much success; Uruk (Warka), the seat of the Nana-Ishtar cult. The latter two from their position looked toward North Babylonia and exercised a corresponding political influence. In North Babylonia the most impor- tant cities are Babylon, the city of Marduk, but it was not until later that it rose to pre-eminence; Kish (Uhaimir?); Cutha (Tel-Ibrahim), the city of Nergal; farther north Sippar (Abu-Habba), the seat of North Babylonian sun-worship. It is known to us chiefly by the excavations of Rassam and more recently of Scheil. Abu Habba is the Sippar of Shamash, the sun-god. But there was another Sippar (of Ammit) whose site is un- known though it was probably not far distant from the former and, therefore, a sort of pendant to it. The modern Deir has been thought to repre- sent its site. It is doubtless identical with the otherwise named Sippar of Arura. In one in- scription we read also of a "Sippar of the desert" EARLIEST IMMIGRATIONS OF SEMITES 25 and called the "Old Sippar" in which designation there probably is reference merely to the more ancient ruins of the city. Dur-ilu, with its worship of Ann, the sky-god, is still unidentified. It com- manded the passes leading into Elam and was, therefore, the first city to bear the brunt of the Elamite attacks: Upi (Opis), on the Tigris, was the most northerly of the large Babylonian cities. Others we need not mention here. Farther to the north the Mesopotamian steppe begins, and here as we go northward on the Tigris we pass the larger cities: Ashur (KaUa-Shergat), Caleh (Nim- rud), and Nineveh, which in later times became the capital of the Assyrian kingdom. Lying to the east, toward Media, lay Arbail (Arbela, the modern Irbil) commanding the eastern region of Assyria between the upper and lower Zab. Here, too, was the junction of the highways leading to Media and the regions around the Urumia Sea. To return again to the country between the two rivers, we note the mountainous region of the Singara, the Sinjar Eange, which in former times must have counted many cities even though no trace of them remains in our historical records. The valleys of the Khabur and Balikh, further westward, which run from north to south, offered the necessary physical conditions for larger settle- ments in the great Mesopotamian plain. Numer- ous mounds enclosing the remains of ancient cities 26 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA dot this entire region and, doubtless, liold their treasures for the future pick and spade. The most important of all, and one that succeeded in maintaining a prosperous existence until late in history, was Harran on the upper Balikh. It was the northern seat of the cult of the moon-god: Arban and Tel-Halaf will be referred to under Assyria. These are by no means all of the important cities of Babylonia. With the exception of the more arid portions of these regions it is scarcely possible for us to overestimate the numerous towns and villages which dotted the plains and hillsides. Babylonia, especially in its prosperous periods, like Egypt, tilled its soil more after the style of the gardener than that of the agricul- turalist, and this form of husbandry supports a greater population and lends itself to concen- tration. The cities above named are those only which on account of their political and religious importance were prominent in the life of the nation. They are, moreover, in part, those in which the excavations have been conducted which have given us a Imowledge of the land. Number- less other mounds hold the secrets of their for- gotten past. CHAPTEE IV THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM THE EARLIEST TIMES, CIE. 3000 B.C. The Semitic Babylonians on entering the country took possession of it in the same way as history teaches us their kinsmen obtained their posses- sions in later times — the Chaldaeans in Baby- lonia, the Hebrews in Canaan. They pressed forward into the open country, asserting them- selves there in the face of a half-hearted opposi- tion. Gradually the cities fell into their hands, and, therewith, they were masters of the land. Formerly wandering nomads they now became dwellers in cities. The old civilization they took over without reserve. Political changes of great importance followed of necessity. Formerly they were free nomads under the leadership of a sheikh, now they became subjects of a king. The leader knew better than his "brothers" whom he led how to use the institutions which he found at hand to his own advantage. We must, consequently, assume the existence ' at first of a number of city-kingdoms correspond- ing to the old centres of culture, which had been founded long before our knowledge of them 27 28 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA begins. Each of the invading tribes took posses- sion of one city or another for itself. As nomads, the different tribes were natural enemies unless there existed between them a blood-covenant. Now again, the kings were scarcely in possession of their new kingdoms before the old feeling of hostility asserted itself among them. New wars had to be waged. Here one emerged from the fray of battle victorious, another fell, until at length, and gradually, the numerous petty city- states were fashioned into several larger king- doms. This accomplished, the old status quo of the Sumerian age, so far as relates to the cul- tural necessities of the land, was once more regained. It is natural to expect that the oldest monu- ments of the Semitic period will be found in the inscriptions of the kings of the different large cities who were at war with one another. This expectation is confirmed by the latest discoveries. Few as these inscriptions are, in proportion to what remains to be unearthed, they are neverthe- less quite sufficient to substantiate the correctness of our inferences, from the natural order of devel- opment, as to conditions of life in the primitive period. The oldest inscriptions which have come down to us are from the kings of Lagash in South Babylonia, of Vr, TJruk, and Kish farther to the THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 29 north, and of the city whose name we are unable to read/ all of which were engaged with one another in a war of subjugation. All these are to be assigned to a period before 3000 b.c, speak- ing generally from 3500 b.c. down to about 3000 B.C. During this time the wars of the Semitic city-kings were fought. To enter into a detailed narrative of their conflicts would be a thankless task, and the recital of the unspeakable combina- tion of signs which make up their heroes' names, the correct pronimciation of which is still an enigma, would convey no meaning to the non- specialist. The outcome of these wars was greater kingdoms. The king of the conquering city became the sovereign of the conquered princes, who thenceforth bear the title of patesi. All these kings, especially those in the South, still wrote in Sumerian; indeed, Sumerian continued to be used much longer as the literary language in South Babylonia than in North Babylonia — almost a thousand years longer. We have numer- ous inscriptions from patesis of Lagash, that is, from vassal princes of a ruling king. They belong to the closing period of the fourth millenium b.c, and the last of them were contemporaries of the South Babylonian "kings of Burner and Akhad" to be mentioned shortly. Some of the earlier of these South Babylonian • Vid. p. 23 and note. 30 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA patesis were subject to North Babylonian kings, two of whom, Shargani-shar-ali (Sargon I.) and his son Naram-Sin, we are acquainted with through their own inscriptions. The first of these still calls himself "King of Agade," a city in North Babylonia. Thus it is seen that the South was subjugated by the North. The inscriptions which relate to his reign and that of Naram-Sin 's prove that these kings extended their conquests over all Western Asia to an extent, at least, equal to that to which they were carried at any time under Babylonian influence. They ruled not only Babylonia and Mesopotamia^ but also Syria and Palestine. Sargon is said to have embarked upon the Mediterranean. He records that in an expedi- tion which lasted for three years he conquered regions beyond the sea. "We do not know whether he here refers only to Cyprus, but the conquest would appear to have been more far-reaching than that. One thing is certain, namely, that this was no mere plundering exploit, but a lasting. sub- jugation. He expressly states that he erected his monuments of victory in the subjugated terri- tories, and established an organized government in the land. Captives were taken thence to Baby- 1 A monolith with an inscription of Naram-Sin was discovered at Diarbekr, near the headwaters of the Tigris to the N. E. of Mt. Masius. Another was found in Susa, but, as the inscription of the Elamite king, Sutruk-Nakhundi, which was carved upon it later, states, it was found in Sippar. THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 31 Ion. There Babylonian laws were imposed, and thither Babylon's mandates were carried. Most noteworthy of all, Babylonian governors and officials sent their official reports to the king couched in his own tongue. Two thousand years before a word of Greek was heard in the Mid- land Sea natives of its isles were familiar with the cuneiform script and read the language of Babylon. The traces of Babylonian influence there in ancient times are not wanting. That wars were waged with the barbarians of the North lay in the very nature of the situation. Arabia, Dilmun (in the Persian Gulf), Magan (bordering on South Babylonia and the Persian Gulf), Melukha (on northwest of Arabia) like- wise were called to arms against the forces of these kings. Thus, nothing short of a great Baby- lonian kingdom was founded, extending over the greater part of Western Asia, vying in extent with the dominions of Assyria in her most flourish- ing period. The names of Sargon and Naram- Sin are, therefore, linked with an early golden age in the history of Babylonian Semites. Their Semitism is attested even by their inscriptions, which in contrast to those of South Babylonia are written in Semitic. Their date is about 3000 b.c.^ * The date usually assigned, on the basis of an inscription of Nabuna'id (555 B.C.), to Naram-Sin is 3750 B.C. and to his father, Sargon, cir. 3800 B.C. The arguments presented in favor of setting aside Nabuna'id's statement are insufficient, and, to my mind. 32 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Their contemporaries were patesis of Lagash. Conspicuous among them is Grudea, from whom several long inscriptions have come down to us. These bear witness, as do those of Sargon and his son, to the widespread rule of Babylonian power and civilization. In the accounts of his buildings, on which he dwells with pride, he tells us whence he procured the various materials for their construction. Cedars were brought from Mount Amanus, dolerite stone for his statues from Magan. This bears witness to the extension of peaceful intercourse at this period, and makes at the same time for the spread of Sumerian culture in the preceding days, when similar condi- tions existed. The ideas and political achieve- ments of this and the preceding age continued to exert great influence down to the latest times, even when their origin was but little understood. When Nabuna'id, the last king of Babylon, found an inscription of Sargon 's son, Naram-Sin, and appealed to the scholars of his court for informa- tion as to its age, they had not the historical data at hand to make a correct computation. They roughly ascribed it to 3200 years before his own time, or to cir. 3800 b.c, thereby exceeding its real age by 800 years or more. [The number is plausible as they are, there is a strong preponderance of probability derived from other sources that Nabuna'id had adequate data for his reckoning. — Craig. THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 33 reached by a method of reckoning which prevailed everywhere in antiquity; it is based upon astro- logical cycles — 40 x 80 years. Forty is the num- ber of the vernal constellation of the Pleiades, and eighty is also a customary cycle, and was known to Mohammed as Jchuqub. The savants of the. king doubtless intended by adopting this method to appeal to his vanity. A reign that began a new epoch was illustrious as introducing a new world era ; and so it happened, but not in the way the court flatterers intended. Cyrus came and with him a new epoch for the Orient.] The more or less isolated facts known to us of these times do not furnish sufficient material for the framing of an adequate picture of them. It is, moreover, a matter of minor interest, even in connection with a more minute treatment of the history of Western Asia, to follow in detail the wars waged between these city-kingdoms and their varying fortunes, now winning the prize of victory, now bemoaning the fate of the vanquished. As it was in Islam after the fall of the Caliphate, and in Syria almost always when it was not under the rule of a greater power, so it was here. We have to do for the most part with kings of uncer- tain names whose deeds had significance only for their own age. It is still impossible to bring the majority of the events recorded in their inscrip- 34 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA tions into sure and satisfactory relation either chronologically or geographically. At present they are of importance only to the specialist. Of more general interest is the question as to the general development of Babylonia, in view of these mutual hostilities. It is very plain that a state of strife was general at the time. So far as our present knowledge extends only Sargon and Naram-Sin ruled over a large West Asiatic Kingdom. How far the rule of the kings of Kish, Uruk, Lagash, etc., reached cannot in each case be determined. It is true that Un^al-zag-gi-si of Uruk records that he marched from the lower sea to the upper sea, that is, from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean.^ We must, therefore, >The location of the city Az would have an important bearing on our knowledge at this point if it were certainly known. E-anna- du, patesi of Lagash, narrates that h^ conquered Uruk, Ur, and Larsa. And immediately following (11. 12-19) he adds that he destroyed the city of Az and killed its patesi, destroyed Milimme and exterminated Arua. The last two are unknown. Judging from the connection with Uruk, Ur, and Larsa we would naturally look for Az in Babylonia. The mention of a patesi as ruler of the city also points in that direction. It is to be noticed, however, that while these are only subjugated Az is destroyed, and, as a rule, this extreme measure was adopted only with cities that lay without the bounds of the kingdom. Especially important is Gudea's state- ment that he brought shirgal (parutu)-stone for mace-heads from Mt. Ur-in-gi "and (near?) uru-az-ki on the upper sea." The city must, therefore, have been on the Mediterranean coast. With this agrees what we know from Sennacherib that shirgal-stone was used for mace-heads before his time, and the mace-head of Gudea shows that the shirgal-stone was limestone from the Lebanon and Anti- Lebanon. This is further confirmed by the inscriptions of Tiglath- pileser III. The writing uru-Az-ki, or uru-ki-Az (brick of Eannadu 5, 4), likewise favors an extra-Babylonian location for this city. THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 35 conclude that these city-kings ruled at times over large territories; at all events we are compelled to think that this period did not belong to the primitive age of civilization, or that Babylonian cities and rulers then broke forth from their nar- row boundaries for the first time. Even in these days of hoary antiquity there emerge practically the same conditions in this respect as existed later during the wars of Babylonia with Assyria, or at the time of the fall of the Caliphate. A further question arises, viz. : to what body of Semites do the kings of this time belong? Inces- sant change and internecine wars point to a period of dissolution or disorder. The conditions are such as must have marked the beginning of the Canaanite immigration or the close of the period during which the first Semites held the country. The movements which we describe as immigra- tions are not completed at once and do not imply the immediate subjugation of the old inhabitants by the new intruders. The fait accompli is pre- ceded by many attempts and reverses and often by centuries of intermittent struggle. In civilized lands the population is never, ethnologically speaking, of unmixed stock. When, therefore, in times of warfare we see first one city then another victorious, the victors in this instance may belong predominantly to one layer of the population, in that to another. We must then conceive of it as 36 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA a transitional period, the period of the gradual influx of the new Canaanite hordes in the face of the determined opposition by the older Baby- lonians. In this connection we must bear in mind that the character of the political regime of a civilized state is dependent not upon its ethnic affinities but upon its civilization. The Normans who conquered England very soon — counting still by centuries — became Englishmen. The ruling houses of England and Russia are English and Eussian despite their German descent. The transitional period which we are inclined to assume for the earliest rulers was, conse- quently, strongly influenced by Canaanites. The state of things which confronts us is much the same as that which we shall meet again in Baby- lonia in consequence of the Chaldean immigra- tion. It ended with victory for the Canaanites and their subsequent spread over the whole land. With the first dynasty of Babylon the victory is complete ; and also in the time of the later kings of Ur. We must consequently regard Urgur and Dungi, and their contemporaries, the last patesis of Lagash, as ruling at a time when the Canaanite was already in the land. The transitional and unstable character of the age is further attested by the noteworthy facts in connection with the development of the arts. The sculptures and writing of the first king of THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 37 Lagash, Ur-Nina, are in part so crude that we might imagine ourselves face to face with the beginnings of civilization. But the character of the script, nevertheless, proves that the first stages of development then belonged to a distant past. Soon after this monuments of much better workmanship appear. Eannadu, the grandson of Urnina, left behind him a monument, the so-called "Stele of Vultures," in which we note a great advance in the artist's work. The statues of Gudea manifest not only an aptness for technical work of the first order, but also an artistic com- prehension on the part of the artist in all that is unconventional, which puts him in the same class with the brilliant artists of the old empire of Egypt. Futhermore, they show the development of a conventional idea in body-pose and arrange- ment of dress, which, with the execution of the work, presuppose centuries of patient study, Thus we are forced to conclude that the crudity of Urnina 's art finds its explanation in a temporal decline of culture in Lagash as a natural result of conquest, or of other unknown causes. Although it is at present impossible to assign Sargon and Naram-Sin to their proper chrono- logical places, so much at least is certain they belonged to the same centuries as the patesis of Lagash. Their sculptures and inscriptions show the same delicacy of execution, though to some 38 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA extent there is an individuality of style, and their writing has a particularly definite character which is the certain result of long use for monumental purposes. They both employ Semitic instead of Sumerian in their inscriptions in common with the North Babylonian kings of Kish, whose writing is likewise strikingly similar to theirs. As a gen- eral rule Sumerian was employed as the ofBeial language in inscriptions of South Babylonia, whereas in the North the Babylonian-Semitic pre- vailed. And this was the case not only in Baby- lonia itself but also in subject lands, and in those which had yielded to the spell of her civilization during the time of the North Babylonian rulers. A dedicatory offering, which probably came from Sippar, contains an inscription of a king of Gutium (Armenia south of Lake Van), which is written exactly like those of Naram-Sin. An- other from a king of the Lulubi, in the Zagros, shows the same character. The picture which, with the help of the material at our disposal, we have sketched of the most important events, and the chronological succes- sion of the kings suggested, are presented with many reservations which admit the possibility of fundamental changes. It may not be amiss at this point to enter briefly into a few matters of detail. We know, for example, from an inscription found at Nippur of a king who calls himself THE BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 39 "lord (?) of Kengi," that is, Sumer or South Babylonia, "and . . ." The name of the city which should follow is broken off. It is impossi- ble to determine his date and no reasons exist for placing him before those that follow. The inscrip- tion reads: "To the God Bel, the lord of lands, En-shag- kush-an-na, the lord (?) of Kengi, king of . . . the spoil of Kish, the wicked of heart, presented. ' ' The inscription relates to a victory over the city of Kish, whose kings according to inscriptions referred to below were rulers of Babylonia. Man- ishdu-shu, the king of Kish, is known from a short inscription and also from a lengthy one upon an obelisk found in Susa. As it contains the record of a land-survey of North Babylonian territory it was doubtless brought to Susa from its original site. The name of JJru-Tca-gina, son of En-gil-sa, patesi of Lagash, appears upon it. It is possible to identify this ruler, the son of a patesi, with the well-known Uru-ka-gina, king of Lagash. Me- salim, a son of his, is also mentioned, and he may be identified with great probability with the Mesa- lim to whom Ungal-kurum-sigum, patesi of Lagash, dedicated a mace-head. Another king of Kish from whom we have inscriptions is Urufiush. He tells of victories won over Elam and a border people known as the Bara'se. And one named Ur-sag-uddu calls him- 40 BABYLONIA AND ASSYB,IA self "king of Kish and king of . . ." He also consecrated an object of some kind to Bel of Nip- pur. Furthermore, a lance-head was found in Telloh, below the strata of Ur-nina, belonging to Ungal-da m-ak {!) king of Kish. One or two other kings of Uruk are also known to us from the inscriptions of Nippur, who like- wise can be assigned to this period only in a general way. The determination of their relation to one another or to those previously mentioned is not possible. The one who left behind him the longest inscrip- tion is Vngal-zag-gi-si, "king of Uruk, king of the land, son of U-Kush, patesi of .the city of the War Chariot." He lays claim to the old culture cities of Ur, Larsa, and the city of the War Chariot, and boasts of subjugating all lands from east to west and of having marched in triumph from the lower sea (the Persian Gulf) to the upper sea (the Mediterranean). Two other kings, Ungal-ki-gub-ni-du, and Vn- gal-si-Msal, co-regent, and probably son of the former, claim sovereignty over Uruk and Ur. CHAPTER V KINGS AND PATESIS OF LAGASH Feom Lagash we have in addition to some older and as yet undeciphered inscriptions those of Ur-nina, the son of Ni-gu-du, king of Lagash. He was succeeded by his son A-kur-gal, who in turn was followed by his son E-anna-du I. A very important stele of victory, the so-called stele of vultures, and several inscriptions of E-anna-du have been discovered. In these he calls himself as well as his father patesi. It appears, therefore, that after Ur-nina Lagash lost its inde- pendence. Once, however, E-anna-du calls both himself and his father king, and since he reports victories over other cities he must at times have regained his independence. He conquered the mountains of Sumashtu. That is, Mesopotamia and Syria, and also the North Babylonian city Gish-gal, the city of the War Chariot, Uruk, Ur, Larsa, Az, Susa(!) and others— in short, an entire kingdom. The king of Opis appears to have been his chief opponent, and he may origi- nally have been his sovereign with both Opis and Kish under him. E-anna-du subdued Kish and 41 42 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA assumed sovereign title over it. Opis appears to have risen again to power after the defeat of its king. E-anna-du was succeeded by his brother En- anna-du,^ and a cone inscription of his son and successor, En-temena, affords us a glance at the conditions of the time and the relations existing between several of the rulers and states. It tells of a certain boundary dispute that had existed. Me-salim, the king of Kish, of whom we have pre- viously spoken, had marked off by a stele the boundary line between Lagash and the city of the War Chariot. These cities were, therefore, neighbors, and also his vassals. Ush, the patesi of the city of the War Chariot, removed Me- salim 's stele and made an attack on the terri- tory of Lagash, but was vigorously attacked and driven back by Me-salim, who exercised over him sovereign authority. Under E-anna- du I., the uncle of En-temena, the delimi- tation of the boundary was again effected, by means of a canal, in co-operation with En-a-kalli, » The genealogy is : Ur-nina A-kur-gal E-anna-du I. En-anna-du I. En-temena En-anna-du II. I Lumma-dur. KINGS AND PATESIS OF LAGASH 43 the patesi of the city of the War Chariot, and Me-salim's boundary stone/ which had been removed by Ush was restored to its place. Then JJr-lumma, another patesi of the city of the War Chariot, and probably the successor of En-a-kalli, entered upon fresh hostilities against En-anna-du, the brother and successor of E-anna-du, and destroyed the boundary stones. The war appears to have been waged at first chiefly by E-anna-du, then by En-temena who came off victor, putting Ur-lumma to rout and appointing Hi, a former priest, as patesi in his stead in the city of the War Chariot. En-temena 's inscription then tells us, in Col. IV., that he commanded Hi to construct cer- tain canals and buildings and imposed upon him a tribute of 36,000 gur of grain. We see from this that Me-salim was king of Kish and suzerain of Lagash (and the other cities of Babylonia) prior, at least, to E-anna-du. And since we know, from the "mace-head" inscrip- tion,2 the name of the patesi of Lagash who was subject to him we must, accordingly, assign him a place before Ur-nina. Furthermore, we find Lagash enjoying a more independent position and defending its rights after the victories of E-anna- du. It now appears as the suzerain of another state which up to that time stood upon an equality ' Probably similar to that of Man-ishdu-shu, discovered in Susa (p. 39). 2 P. 39. 44 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA with itself. When, nevertheless, its patesi does not assume the title of king, it must on its part have recognized a higher imperium. It is possi- ble, however, that this relation was now only a formal one, such as appears to have existed prior to Hammurabi between the kings of North and South Babylonia, and occasionally between the king of Egypt and his provincial princes. En-temena was succeeded by his son, En-anna- du II., and he in turn by his son, Lumma-dur, who is known to us from his own inscriptions. At this point the succession of the patesis of Lagash, so far as we know it, is interrupted. We are tempted to put next in the line of its rulers TJru-ka-gina, the hing of Lagash. The general appearance of his inscriptions at least suggest this rather than priority to Ur-nina. But we are well aware that nothing is more certain than the inconclusiveness of arguments based upon such data. Uru-ka-gina takes at one time the title king of Lagash, at another king of Girsu. The site of Girsu is not yet determined; but it always stood in close con- nection with Lagash. The adoption of different titles proves, however, that the reign of Uru-ka- gina was not free from the usual civil strifes. Within this chronological gap must fall also the reigns of 8 argon and Naram-Sin, for they can- not be placed very much before Ur-gur of Ur, and the next series of patesis, as proved by documents, KINGS AND PATESIS OF LAGASH 45 is immediately connected with them. "We have seal impressions that were appended to dispatches sent by a patesi of Lagash to Sargon and Naram- Sin. This patesi, Ungal-ushum-gal by name, was "servant" to both, and his son Ur-e was in all probability his successor. Another patesi of Ur, viz., JJr-utu, appears as contemporary of Ur-e; thus the same relation of Ur to the North at this period is established. The next patesi of Lagash was Ur-ba'u, of whom we have a number of statues and inscriptions, which were found in Telloh (Lagash). Nam-makh-ni, who married Ur-ba'u 's daughter, was also a patesi of Lagash, and doubtless Ur-ba'u 's successor. The next patesi known to us is Gudea, who can- not have been separated by a great space of time from Nam-makh-ni. He is the best known of the rulers of Lagash. We possess several of his statues, a large number of smaller monuments, two long inscriptions and numerous short ones. Lagash must have been a flourishing and wealthy city during his regime. His inscriptions tell of the buildings which he erected, for which he imported the material from all parts of the world known to him.* Ur-ningirsu, Gudea 's son, united to his patesi- ate the honors of priesthood. He exercised the functions of the latter office under Dungi, the son • P. 34, note. 46 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of Ur-gur of Ur. At this point, then, the chrono- logical nexus between the princes of Lagash and their overlords is again discovered. It would appear that Ur-ningirsu first held the patesiate, and that, for reasons unknown to us, he was deposed from that office. Convicted or suspected of inability to rule, he was not, however, deemed unworthy of the priesthood. At all events his son, Gal-ka-ni, possibly also his grandson, Khala-lania, still held rule under Dungi as patesi of Lagash. Khala-lama has left us a short inscription upon a fragment of a statue which he dedicated to the goddess Bau for the life of Dungi, which proves that they were contemporaries. The title patesi, however, is not clearly assumed in the inscription by Khala-lama, though it is given to his father.^ The last of the patesis of Lagash knoAra to us from inscriptions, is Ur-ningul, who brings us down to the time of the kings of "Ur and the Four Quarters of the World." \ / During the last few pages we have diverged somewhat from the main course of our story for the purpose of introducing a few details as side- lights upon the historical situation. Let us now return to the larger movements of history. In ' The inscription reads: "To the mother of Lagash, the goddess Bau, his mistress, for the (preservation of the) life of Dungi, the powerful king, the king of Ur, the king of Shumer and Akkad, Kha- la-lama, the son of Gal-ka-ni, patesi of Lagash." — Craig. KINGS AND PATESIS OF LAGASH 47 learned circles and in political life the geographi- cal names and political titles of these earliest times continued long in use, and even in the latest period were greatly in favor. The wars of the Semites, whether or not they were the continu- ation of Sumerian conditions, resulted in the for- mation of two great kingdoms in Babylonia. The one had its seat of empire in South Babylonia, and its kings bore the general title "king of Shumer and Ahkad." The other was in North Babylonia, and its kings called themselves "kings of the Four Quarters of the World." Farther still to the north, with its chief city (possibly Harran) in Mesopotamia, another kingdom devel- oped whose kings assumed the title "kings of the World." Between these three kingdoms wars were waged and frequently one king triumphed over the others. Thus we see here a further development of the period of the city-kingdoms. Only a few details of some of these rulers have come down to us. We know, however, that their titles maintained their significance down to the last days of Babylonian independence. All the later kings of Babylonia and Assyria, each accord- ing to his possessions, adopted them. Within the sphere of Babylonian culture, at this time, stood Elam, Anzan, and Suri, now at war with her, now her subjects, as we can most plainly see from the testimony derived from the Assyrian 48 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA period. Anzan, and Suri, from which came the later name Lyco-Syria, began on the west of Elam and stretched in a northerly course around the Mesopotamian plain, thus reaching virtually from Media to Cappadocia. To the northeast was the barbarous people known as the JJmman- Manda, or Manda hordes, the Babylonian Scythi- ans. On the north, practically corresponding to Armenia, lay Gutium, or the territory of the "Kuti," from one of whose kings we have an inscription in the Semitic language and in the style of the time of Naram-Sin. It relates to the dedication of an object set up in Bablyonia, prob- ably in Sippar, and is similar to the dedications made by foreigners to the Greek oracle. In Asia Minor, beginning with Cappadocia, lay the region of the Khatti, or Hittites, who came to the front later. The northern part of Palestine was known soon after as the "West-land." The statements, already referred to, about Sargon, whether his- torical or not, prove that the Mediterranean was navigated. Arabia on its western side was known as Melukha, and on the eastern as Magan, and appears to have been more accessible to the an- cient Babylonians than it was later to the Assyri- ans or to us of modern times. Southward, the Persian Gulf must also have been navigated, for Dilmun, the island Bahrein, came within the bounds of Babylonian interests, and monuments KINGS AND PATESIS OF LAGASH 49 with cuneiform inscriptions have been found there. It is, moreover, scarcely conceivable that Gudea brought the stone from Magan by any other means or route than the sea. As Naram- Sin's expeditions prove, Dilmun, Magnan, and Melukha fell more within the Babylonian horizon (as, indeed, they did in Islamic times) than they did when Assyria was at the height of her power. The numerous monuments of this period evince technical skill of the highest order. The earliest inscriptions and monuments of the kings of Lagash are naturally very crude, so markedly so that we are tempted to attribute lack of skill to a decline consequent upon the Semitic invasion. But there quickly followed a new stage comparable to that of the Old Empire in Egypt. The inscriptions of Sargon and Naram-Sin are distinguished by a beautiful script, and so excellent is the technical execution of Gudea 's statues that archaeologists once thought it necessary to assume a Greek influ- ence. A vast number of documents of this period relating to the administration of temples and lands have been recovered. They belonged origi- nally to the Lagash archives. Such was Babylonia in her sphere of influence and cultural attainments 3000 b.c. and earlier. Possibly at that time she reached the zenith of her development. The age of the beginnings of civilization, the age when the Sumerians stood 50 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA upon the level of the Italic peoples in the eighth century b.c, of the Slavs from the eighth to the twelfth century a.d., had then long passed away, leaving to history neither monument nor message. CHAPTEE VI THE KINGS OF UR, ISIN, LARSA, CIR. 3000-2400 B.C. The last inscriptions of the patesis of Lagash, who are known to us, and who were irhmediate successors of Gudea, contain dedications to nfiw kings from whom we have numerous inscriptions from the cities of South and North Babylonia. These rulers call themselves "king of Ur, king of Sumer and Akkad." Their inscriptions, at least those from the southern cities, are, like those from Lagash, written in Sumerian. We have, in these facts, evidence of a complete change 'from the preceding time. The sceptre of sovereignty has passed from the north to the south. The kings of Ur rule Babylonia instead of the kings of Agade — inscriptions found in North Babylonia show that it, as well as the South, passed to their dominion. This kingdom of Sumer and Akkad was ruled over by three dynasties. The first is known as the Dynasty of Ur, so-called in accordance with its title and seat of government. Chief among its kings were UR-GUR AND HIS SON DUNGI 3000 B.C. Their numerous inscriptions contain only records of the building of temples in all the 51 52 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA important cities of Babylonia, in the South as well as in the North. As regards their political deeds and power they convey no direct information. It is nevertheless clear from the expulsion of the North Babylonian rulers that they came into pos- session of their territory. Dungi in one of his North Babylonian inscriptions written in Semitic calls himself "king of the Tour Eegions" as Naram-Sin does. Apart, therefore, from the internal revolution, the Babylonian domain of power and culture remained as it was before. Just as Dungi in North Babylonia had previously done so his successors call themselves in their inscriptions, found in the South, "kings of Ur, Aings of the Four Eegions," and omit the title 'king of Sumer and Akkad." Their seat of gov- ernment must consequently be looked for in the North. The political centre moved steadily toward the capitals of Sargon and Naram-Sin, and the South, with its adherence to Sumerian thought and modes of life, lost proportionately in importance. Even the names of this dynasty, and all the follow- ing ones, are purely Semitic in form. It would, therefore, appear that Dungi 's successors, like Naram-Sin, were North Babylonians, who resided in the South. About 2600 or 2500 the dynasty came to an end. The supremacy passed into the hands of less vigorous rulers whose capital lay farther to the North. THE KINGS OF UR, ISIN, LARSA 53 THE KINGS OF ISIN— 2600-2500 (?) The second ruling-liouse is called the dynasty of Isin, after its capital. Its kings call themselves "kings of Isin," "kings of Burner and Akkad." Here again we have evidence of another revolu- tion. Even the names of the kings bear witness to this fact. For, notwithstanding their use of Sumerian in their inscriptions, in common with their predecessors and successors, they departed from the previously established custom in the South of giving to their own names a Sumerian form, it is evident at once that theirs are Semitic like those of the northern kings, Naram-Sin and others. The last of these kings was called Ishme- Dagan ("Dagan heard")- His complete title was, "Ishme-Dagan, the governor of Nippur, the prince of Ur, the Uddadu of Eridu, lord of Uruk, king of Isin, king of Sumer and Akkad, the beloved spouse of the goddess Nana." It is clear from this compound that the name of the deity Bag an is "Canaanitic"; and we have even at this early period Canaanites before us, a fact of importance as we shall see when we come to discuss the first dynasty of Babylon. Five kings of this dynasty are known at present, ishbigieea, GAMIL-NINIB, LIBIT-ANUNIT, BUE-SIN, ISHME-DAGAN. The close of the dynasty we may assign approxi- mately to 2500-2400 B.C. 54 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA THE DYNASTY OF LARSA— 2500-2400 The third and last series of the independent rulers of Southern Babylonia exercised sover- eignty from Larsa, the capital, from which the dynasty derives its name. Three of its kings are known to us, viz., nur-ramman, sin-iddin, and rim- sin, who succeeded in turn to the throne. From the time of these and the preceding kings a great number of business documents have come down to us, and these, since they are dated according to important events, furnish us with much valuable information about the military movements and other significant undertakings of the times. But no royal inscriptions giving a historical resume have been found. Instead of them we have only the usual building and dedicatory inscriptions. Rim-Sin, the last king of the dynasty, was an Elamite — not a Babylonian. He expressly states in his inscriptions that he was the son of the Elamite Kudur-Mabuk, who appears to have sub- jugated the entire domain of Babylonia as far as Phoenicia, and left his son upon the throne of Southern Babylonia as the last "king of Sumer and Akkad." Elam was the most powerful opponent that Babylonia had, as is sufficiently apparent from the records of earlier times. At this time she must have descended with irresistible force, for the THE KINGS OF UR, ISIN, LARSA 55 whole land of Babylonia and its dependent states became the vassals of Elam. When we bear this in mind, together with what has just been said of the probable Canaanite connection of the last dynasty, and with what we shall presently dis- cover to have been the facts in connection with the first dynasty of Babylon, it will be evident that the role of the "Babylonian Semites" has come to an end. The first post-Sumerian period of Babylonian history has already passed, and we find ourselves in a time when new conditions are emerging into view. Other peoples are entering into the land, or are already there. The old wars are waged again, and once more there is no Baby- lonian kingdom. The powerful neighbor's star is, for a time, in the ascendant and a heavy hand is laid upon the old culture-land — conditions which in later times frequently reoccur. CHAPTER VII THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON— " CANAANITE '-' With respect to the changes which occurred in the different dynasties previously described much remains uncertain and unknown. We are but imperfectly informed both as regards the exact time and the causes and conditions which pro- duced them. In the period to which we now come the case is altered. The essential aspects of the change which followed these dynastic struggles emerge in the clear light of history. It was a change which culminated in new relations which were the natural outcome of the preceding wars. At the same time that the Southern Babylonian kings of Larsa and some of their predecessors of the dynasty of Isin^ held sway there ruled in Northern Babylonia, in Babylon, or by preference in Sippar (owing perhaps to its connection with Agade, the capital of Sargon I.), a succession of princes which, following the Babylonian king-lists we designate The First Babylonian Dynasty. After the time of Sargon and Naram-Sin, when ' The exact situation of Isin is not yet determined, but it evi- dently lay to the north of Erech. — Craig. 56 FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON 57 the North was predominant, as we have already seen, kings of the South as early as the second dynasty of Ur lay claim in their titles to sover- eignty over the North. Numerous business docu- ments have been recovered from this period, and it is noteworthy that in them the rulers of North- ern Babylonia are never called kings. It is not until the later subjugation of the South that the royal title is ascribed to them. The ready infer- ence to be drawn is that the northern rulers exer- cised sovereignty as vassals of the kings of the South. The Southern Babylonian kings of Isin, similarly to the kings of the dynasty of Ur, and contrary to Naram-Sin, took up their residence again in the old capital of Sumer and Akkad, and left the rule of the North to the independent man- agement of their vassals in Babylon. That, at least, was the formal state of affairs. It is, how- ever, a very frequent occurrence in such relations that the alleged sovereign is dependent upon his vassals who possess the power, while the title alone is his. And it is quite possible that there existed between the "kings of Sumer and Akkad" and their "vassals" in Northern Babylonia a relation similar to that between the Caliphs of Bagdad and the Buyids, or other Sultans. The same relation existed under the kings of the Larsa dynasty. The last of these kings, the Elam- ite, Eim-Sin, was overthrown by the fifth king of 58 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA this first Babylonian dynasty after the vassal rela- tion had become weakened, doubtless long before, and at the time was virtually ineffective. With this change a new political era was ushered in. The independence of the South was destroyed for all time. Thereafter, the kings of Babylon rule the Southern Babylonian kingdom and bear the title "king of Sumer and Akkad," a title which no later ruler bore alone with the exception of a few late and unimportant cases in which there was a division of inheritance. The political significance of the South thus came to an end. As under Sargon and Naram-Sin, now it became a province of the North Babylonian kingdom. From now on the kingdom of Babylon was the determining power. It had previously, probably with the fall of the Isin dynasty, taken possession of the North Babylonian kingdom whose rulers called them- selves "kings of the Four Quarters of the World." From this point on Babylonian history virtually becomes a history of Babylon. But the house which transferred the rule to the city of Babylon, from which both the land and its culture were destined to be named as the result of this development of affairs, was not Semitic- Babylonian. It was Canaanite. The evidence is to be found in the names which compose it. These names, eleven in number, and the dates are pro- cured from a Babylonian king-list, and are : FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON 59 SuMU-ABi, dr. 2400-2375 SuMXj-LA-iLu, dr. 2374-2353 Zabu, dr. 2352-2328 Abil-'Sin, dr. 2327-2303 SiN-MUBALLIT 2302-2268 Khammu-rabi 2267-2213 Samsu-iluna 2212-2183 Abeshua 2182-2165 AmmI-satana 2164-2151 Ammi-tsadoq 2150-2116 Samsu-satana 2115-2101 During the last ten years a great many docu- ments belonging to the time of this dynasty have been recovered. From them we are afforded a glimpse into the economic life and ethnological connection of the ruling population of the time. The names of the kings, as we have already seen, prove that the great influx of people which had poured into the land was of Canaanite^ origin. The conclusion is further corroborated by the numerous names which appear in these letters and contracts. The greater proportion of them are such as we meet with in the Old Testament. This great wave of immigration, which may have spread over a considerable period, broke upon the highlands of the West and one portion of it ' By the use of the tenn Canaanite it is not intended to suggest that the conquest was made by Canaanites, but only that the char- acter and language of this body of immigrants was maintained in greater purity and for a longer time by that portion of the same stock which took contemporaneous possession of Canaan. 60 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA flowed into the rich alluvial lands of Babylonia. There, in the meantime, had been a repetition of the same events which had occurred during the first immigration of the Semites. The advancing nomads pressed into the cities from the surround- ing plains ; a ruling population different from that formerly in possession now took its place, and these new inhabitants, like their predecessors, adopted the Babylonian culture and passed through the same experiences. This is the light in which we were inclined to view many of the phenomena appearing during the last South Baby- lonian dynasty. This, then, is the second period of Babylonian history, and at the same time the end of the political domination of Western Asia by Babylon. The same immigration reached Syria and Palestine, and it is possible that a por- tion of it entered Egypt, a fact which would account for the explanation of the Hyksos and the powerful Semitic influence noticeable in Egypt from that time forward. Babylon still held at this time rule o^^er the West. The tribes and princes of Palestine were tributary to the kings of Babylon. The territorial limits of power remained unchanged and were preserved despite the confusion of tribal movements. The interior Orient was still Babylonian, and the conception which we must form of the importance of Baby- lonia for the rest of Asia Minor at this time corre- FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON 61 sponds essentially with that which we have pre- sented of its influence a thousand years earlier. The Orient in possession of the "Canaanites" / presented virtually the same aspects as the Orient of Semitic Babylonia: it was completely under the influence of Sumerian culture which was now further modified by this second influx of Semites. The rule of this first dynasty of Babylon meant a new era ethnologically and politically for Baby- lonia. The political organization effected by the many wars through which the country passed, and of which we have but a limited knowledge, became normative for the future. North Baby- lonia with its central point, Babylon, the capital of the new rulers, exercised upon the future of the country an influence similar to, but much greater, than Bagdad later wielded in Islam. From now on the "kingdom of Babylon" is the province Kar-duniash as it was later called, with Babilu, the holy city of the god Marduk (Merodach), the seat of authority in the Babylonian world of cul- ture. In the history of the world Rome alone can be compared with Babylon when we consider the important role which this city of Marduk played in Western Asia. As in the Middle Ages Rome exercised its power over men's minds and, through its teaching, dominated the world, so did Babylon from this time in the ancient Orient. Just as the 62 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA German kings strove to gain for themselves world- sovereignty in papal Eome, as the heiress of world power, so shall we find later a similar claim by the kings of Assyria who look back to Babylon. The influence of this dynasty appears most con- spicuously in the admiration in which it was held when Babylonian independence was hastening to its close. When after the fall of Nineveh Babylon again rose to political independence under Nebu- chadrezzar, and, for the last time, appeared as mistress in Western Asia every exertion was put forth to represent the new kingdom as a rejuvena- tion of the ancient empire of Khammurabi. His was the golden age to which the latter looked back with reverence, and proudly judged itself to be a Renaissance of that splendid period. It was in Babylonia, as it was in later Judaism, which saw in the rule of David the zenith of Israel's glory. Even in the royal inscriptions the development of more than one and a half thousand years was ignored and, with the painful accuracy of pedan- tic schoolmasters, the royal scribes imitated the forms of the signs and characteristic orthography of Khammurabi 's age. But we must not be misled by the extension of Babylon and the Babylonian empire during this period. It would be a serious error to look for the culmination of Babylonian civilization during the rule of this dynasty. On the contrary, even FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON 63 the execution of the monuments furnishes evi- dence that we are dealing with an epoch of decline. The monumental art of Sargon and Gudea, figures so dimly visible through .the haze of antiquity, exhibit achievements of classic excellence when placed by the side of the work of the artists of the first dynasty. Babylonian rule and inter- course were never so widely extended as then, and the general intellectual measure as well as the artistic products of this second epoch are mark- edly inferior. This second Semitic invasion of Babylonia resulted in deterioration in the high- est elements and evidences of national progress, notwithstanding the material and political im- provements made, especially during the reign of Khammurabi. As it was in Italy with the descent of the Ger- manen, and in Western Asia with the intrusion of the Turks, so it was here. Babylonian history moves from now on along a descending plane. As long as the Semitic people dwelt there they enjoyed the fruits of previously won culture — they created nothing new, they rather corrupted what they found. The regulation of commercial life at this time has been amply illustrated by the discovery of the Hammurabi code of laws in Susa, whither it was carried, like the stele of Naram-Sin,^ by the same » P. 30, note. 64 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA conqueror. It is the oldest code of laws known. One may, therefore, be inclined to attribute to Hammurabi and his age a lofty role in the his- torical development of the race, and they are doubtless entitled to this recognition. But we must, nevertheless, not forget that there previ- ously existed a high culture and social develop- ment which must not be underestimated because we know less concerning it. Fragments of laws exist which antedate Hammurabi's age which reveal an organized life not inferior in its cultural development to that attested by his code. The earlier period has the merit of initiative and attainment, the later adopted and imitated and not infrequently imitated badly. One general characteristic of the social life of that earlier time which distinguishes it from that of the later is, perhaps, discoverable in the fact that religion, and the organized forms of hmnan society dictated by it, were much more funda- mentally effective, whereas from now on the temporal power appears in the forefront. Ham- murabi professes to have received his laws from the hand of the god Shamash, but it is no longer "divine law" that the code presents. It is clearly the "law of the king" which assigns to the hier- archy, as to other classes of society, its appro- priate position, according to it no recognition of leadership. Babylonia at this time occupied a FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON 65 position midway between the earlier state and the later one of military rule in Assyria, which arose partly upon the ruins of the old Babylonian civili- zation as Oriental cities arose upon the tells of ancient settlements. CHi*PTER VIII THE SECOND DYNASTY OF BABYLON— THE SEA-LAND In both the "king-lists" the first dynasty is suc- ceeded by a second, called the dynasty of Shishhu, likewise of eleven kings. Notwithstanding that numerous documents of the time of the first dynasty have come down to us very few have been recovered from the time of the second. This in itself is a sufficient indication that the same condi- tion existed then as we shall be obliged to chroni- cle frequently in the history of Assyria. Periods of retrogression and impotence are generally shrouded in obscurity. Babylonia has now, in fact, entered upon a time when many and fruit- less struggles are put forth to maintain herself as a World-Power. Her best efforts prove abor- tive. She is forced to retreat until, finally, every shred of political independence has been wrested from her; but, all the more clearly shines out her superiority in the works of civilization and science. The names of the eleven kings of this second dynasty are known to us almost entirely from the king-lists. They are, for the most part, put into Babylonian form, or, rather, Sumerian and, con- 66 SECOND DYNASTY OF BABYLON 67 sequently, appear almost as strange to us as those of the oldest kings of Ur. In reality, however, these new conquerors of Northern Babylonia had not hitherto been established in the South. Inasmuch as the movement of civilization was always from the south northward the region at the mouth of the two rivers, and along the Persian Gulf, was naturally more open to migrations. We shall see that, at a later time, this territory was a sort of border-land of Babylonian civilization which was first seized by those who aimed at con- quests in the north. The Babylonians called it The Sea-Land. Its position corresponded, at times, to that of ancient Sumer in so far as the latter had definite geographical and political boun- daries. The cultural significance of the Sea-Land was not, however, co-extensive with that of Sumer. It lay in the nature of things that a people resi- dent here, and that was constantly adding to its strength by fresh accessions from Arabia, was ever upon the alert for the favorable opportunity of political weakness or disintegration in the North. The lust and perhaps necessity of expan- sion was there, and, at the opportune moment, the march up-stream began. The course of events is the same as was frequently witnessed in later times in the case of the Assyrians and Elamites ; the same as so often exists where a powerful and 68 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA conquering state stands face to face with a rich and powerless one. Thus, it would seem, Babylon now fell under the domination of a dynasty which ruled accord- ing to the king-lists 368 years. About 1000 years later there ruled another dynasty of the Sea-Land, the first of whose three kings, Simmash-shikhu, is connected by descent with the former dynasty. In the last millenium b.c, when Chaldean tribes were in possession of large parts of Babylonia it was the Sea-Land that formed the strongest of their numerous "kingdoms." In the time of Sar- gon, king of Assyria, we shall find as his adver- sary Merodach-baladan, the king of the Sea-Land, who for a long time successfully disputed with him the throne of Babylon. He calls himself the offspring of Irba-Marduk, who, therefore, must have reigned before him. Moreover, during the reign of the following Kassite dynasty we know of kings of the Sea-Land who bear Kassite names and probably were related to the Babylonian royal family. The name Simmash-shikhu (clearly Kas- site) points to the same relationship. The exist- ence of an independent state at the mouth of the two rivers barred Babylonia from the Persian Gulf, whereas in the time of Gudea her commerce still found there an easy outlet to adjacent as well as distant lands. The presence of this state and its temporary rule over Babylon herself proves SECOND DYNASTY OP BABYLON 69 that Babylonia has fallen from her former great- ness. Henceforth, it is an inland state whose claim to importance rests upon the strength of its ancient culture and historical traditions, not upon its actual national power. Thus weakened, her boundaries were open to every ambitious conqijeror. The names of the eleven kings and the few facts known about them at present may be added to this meagre sketch of the dynasty which ruled from cir. 2100-1732 : An-ma-ilu 51? years. Ki-AN-Ni-Bi 55? years. Dam-ki-ili-shu' 30? years. IsH-Ki-BAL 15 years. Shu-ush-shi-akhi 27 years. GuL-Ki-SHAR^ 55 years. KiR-GAL-DARA-BAR 50 years. Ai (M^lik)-DARA-KALAMAMA 28 years, son of preceding. E-KUR-txL-ANNA 26 years. Melam-kurkura 6 years. Ea-gamil 9 years. ' This name is met with also outside of the king-lists in the date of a contract-tablet, and in a fragment of an inscription of the Kassite period where the king appears in a r61e that would suggest that it was he who actually established the rule of this dynasty. And Simmash-shikhu is said to have been a descendant of his. ' So the name appears in the lists. According to an inscription of the time of the Pashe dynasty he reigned as king of the Sea-Land 696 years before Nebuchadrezzar I. The name is there written with an old sign Gir (instead of Gul) which apparently was sometimes written in a complicated way by the ancient scribes. 70 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA The sum of the regal years amounts to 368. In the lists the dynasty is called the dynasty of Shish-ku in opposition to the first which is called the dynasty of Tintir (Babylon). Shish-ku ap- pears also to have been a name of Babylon which may have been introduced intentionally by this dynasty in reference to the cult of the capital. CHAPTER IX THE THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON— THE KASSITES CIR. 1700-1130 The third ruling house was also a foreign one, and, unlike the preceding, issued from the East, from Elanj-Media. Kassite soldiers were found in the service of Babylonia during the first dynasty, and the people whose kings were now to occupy the throne of Babylon for the next five centuries called themselves Kashshu (Kassites). Their descendants still existed in the high ranges of the Zagros in the time of Sennacherib. They had several strongly fortified cities and numerous smaller ones, all of which fell before the army of Sennacherib on his second expedition. Their appearance in Babylonia at this time must have resulted from a great movement which, starting from the east and northeast, overran the civilized countries as they went, as the Turks and Mongols did in later times. Of that portion of this stock which flowed into Babylonia we have but a limited knowledge. For the relations which were estab- lished between them and Media and other coun- tries we must await further discoveries. At all events, the influx of these barbarous hordes was 71 72 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of no inconsiderable proportions. From now on we meet frequently in Babylonia with Kassite names even among families of aristocratic birth. To the mixture of races in Babylonia a new ele- ment was, therefore, introduced, and in the "con- fusion of tongues" of Babel there resounded the well-known Kassite vocables with which we have become acquainted through the word-lists and proper names. The Babylonian dynastic tablet ascribes to this dynasty 36 kings with a rule of 546 years. It lasted accordingly from about 1700 to 1130. The names of the majority of these kings have been preserved, and we have a considerable amount of information from royal inscriptions, and other documents, relating to the events of this period. But great gaps in the story remain. We are afforded a glimpse into the development of affairs during the early years of the dynasty by an inscription of AGU-KAKRIME who, it seems almost certain, was the sixth in suc- cession. He calls himself "king of Kashshu and Akkad, king of the great land of Babylon who settled with numerous people the land of Dupli- ash^ (on the border of Elam), king of Padan and Alman (bordering on Media), king of Guti 1 Commonly read I/mliash. The ideographic writing is Ab-nun- na-ki, i.e., large abode. In the inscription V. R. 33 col. 1, 1. 36 the text reads m&t As/i-nun-na-ak.— Craigr. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 73 (Northlands?), the king who rules the four quar- ters of the world." These titles which differ entirely from the customary ones, and the prece- dence given to the Kassites, show that this king was one of the earliest of the new rulers. Karain- dash, who reigned a couple of centuries later, adopts the usual titles and closes the list with "king of Kashshu," and his successors omit it altogether. These barbarians, like the rest, soon adopted the old civilization, and became Baby- lonians. That the weakened condition of Babylonia must have preceded the conquest may be assumed as certain. The kingdom of Khammurabi must, therefore, have gone the way of its predecessors before the barbarian hordes could enter in and possess the land. Its strength must have been broken ; disturbances must have arisen and decay followed. We have testimony to this effect in the inscription of Agu-kakrime, already men- tioned. There we learn that Agu-kakrime brought back to Babylon the statues of Marduk, and his spouse Tsarpanit, from the land of Khani. A couple of centuries later a region in Western Media, on the confines of Assyria, bore this name.^ Changes in geographical boundaries and names of countries were wont to be made quickly at this • We have an inscription of a king, Tukulti-mar, which cannot be definitely assigned to the land of Khani, but is of a late period, with a dedication to the sun-god of Sippar. 74 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA time. The country of Mitani was also known as Khanigalbat, the last part of which is probably to be referred to the so-called Hittite language, of which nothing is known as yet.^ Since we see in the conquest of Mesopotamia by the Mitani the result of a forward movement of the "Hittites" it is natural to connect these two names of coun- tries and regard them as the designations respect- ively of the eastern and western parts of one temporary state (Khani) whose existence ex- plains the later kingdom of Mitani. We have, therefore, here, as we have in the union of Auzan and Suri in old Babylonian geography, a pre- cursor of the later Median kingdom. "We are possibly justified in connecting with this view of the case the fragment of an oracle-text according to which Marduk was captive in the land of Khatti (the Hittites) for twenty-four or thirty- four years. And, as Khani-galbat belonged to Khatti, the latter must, at that time, have reached to Western Media and there included the region 1 Many attempts have been made to decipher the few so-called "Hittite" ideograph-inscriptions, but neither the methods nor the results justify the claims to success made by the decipherers. The most exhaustive and, in some parts only, seemingly plausible, of these efforts is that of Professor Jensen in Z. D. M. G. The Hittite language is now loiown, since Winckler's explorations and excava- tions at Boghaz-koi, the Hittite capital, in 1906, to have been written in cuneiform and syllabic. Some 2500 fragments of tablets, among which are a score of lengthy and complete tablets, have been found. If the ideograph-inscriptions are also " Hittite " the key to their de- cipherment-may now be found. — Craig. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 75 known as Arbach. TMs view of the situation would enable us to see clearly how the two great streams of migration, the one, the Hittite, moving from the west, the other, the Kassite, coming from the east, cease, modify each other, and at the same time by their counter effects influence the old civilization. The case of the Chaldees and Medes from the eighth century to the sixth was similar to that described. This weakness of Babylonia and the complete assimilation of the "Canaanite" population ap- pear more clearly in two other phenomena of this time. The third Semitic immigration, the Aramaic, occurred during this Kassite period, approximately from 1700-1100, and, further. Babylonia's supremacy over the West was con- tested, and, finally, wrested from her hands by Assyria, a new power ambitious of conquest, which was rapidly developing from a city-kingdom. The future was reserved for these two. The Kas- sites, the previous rulers of Babylonia, shared the fate of that empire and must now relinquish their power. As the march of empire was at first from the south toward Babylon, so now it moves further, along the Tigris, to Assyria. This fact constitutes the pivotal point around which the his- tory of Western Asia turns, from about the six- teenth century, when Assyria appears as the rising power upon the field of history. 76 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA During the Kassite dynasty the struggle began between Babylonia and Assyria for supremacy over the old cradle of civilization. The varying changes of fortune which accompanied this strug- gle we can follow, thanks to the ever increasing sources at command, more clearly than we could the events of the earlier period. This war be- tween the old and the new kingdoms and its result is of paramount importance in the political history of the future. The history of Babylonia and that of Assyria concern us, therefore, pri- marily, in so far as they touch and are interwoven with one another. That which we have to consider is two different developments running parallel to one another which can be pursued most easily when presented together. On the other hand, Babylon asserted her independence as a state almost continuously, long after she had fallen from power, and, even at the last, rose again victorious. Moreover, at the beginning of this struggle she was the superior power, and when she stood directly under Assyrian influence she never ceased to have a history and development of her own. If we wish, therefore, to do more than recount the wars between Ashur and Babylon, if, indeed, we wish to do justice to the importance of Babylon as the seat of the old culture, so frankly recognized by Assyria herself, we must follow the history of this independent state by itself. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 77 We have already seen to what territory AgUr kakrime, the Babylonian ruler, laid claim. His power extended no longer over Mesopotamia and the West. The reasons for this we shall see when we come to treat of the development of these regions. In the next inscription known to us after Agu-kakrime 's, viz., that of KARAINDASH I., sovereignty is asserted likewise only over Baby- lonia. We shall see that the first attempts to bring Mesopotamia again under the sceptre were made when Assyria, the ruling power there, was forced to retreat. In Palestine Babylonian rule gave way to Egyptian. It would appear from the manner in which Karaindash's successors speak of him in their letters that he was the head of a new family in the Kassite dynasty. His date was about 1500. That which we know of him, apart from his inscription already mentioned,^ is that he formed a" treaty with Ashur-bel-nisheshu, the king of Assyria, and carried on a correspond- ence with the king of Egypt. This last fact is attested by a letter which one of his successors, ' This inscription is preserved upon a brick and is published iv., R. 36, 3, and in K.B. iii., s. 153. It reads: " For the goddess, Nana, the mistress of E-anna (house of heaven) Karaindash, the mighty king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of Kash- ahti, king of Karduniash, built a temple in E-anna" (probably temple area in city of Erech or Ur). Otherwise he can mean only that he restored the old temple. — Craig. 78 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Burnaburiash, sent about sixty years later to the king of Egypt, Amenophis IV. The discovery of the collection of tablets to which this letter belongs is one of the most surprising and impor- tant that has been made in the Orient. To tell the story^ is at the same time to write of history. In 1887 there were found in Tell-Amama, the site of the ancient capital of Amenophis IV., in Middle Egj^t, about 180 miles from Memphis on the east bank of the Nile, more than three himdred cuneiform tablets and fragments of tablets. They are a remnant of the national archives of Egypt and consist chiefly of letters which were sent to the kings of Egypt, Amenophis III., and his suc- cessor Amenophis IV., by kings of Western Asia and by the Syrian and Palestinian vassal-princes of Egypt. Among them are letters from the kings of Babylon, Assyria, Mitani, which lay to the north of the Euphrates between the Balikh tribu- tary and its western boundary ; from the kings of the Hittites and others. These letters constitute the most valuable documents we possess for the history of Western Asia during this period, and frequent reference to them will be made in what follows. The letters from Babylon, with which we are at present interested, say nothing of her greatness and power. Nevertheless, the existence of the whole collection speaks in unmistakable language of the controlling influence of Babylon THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 79 in earlier times — it is written in the cuneiform script, and with three exceptions in the Semitic- Babylonian language. And, what is of still greater significance, two of the letters from the king of Egypt, one addressed to the king of Babylon, the other to one of his own vassals in Northern Pales- tine, are in the same script and language. The cuneiform script and the Babylonian language were at that time the literary means of communi- cation throughout Western Asia. And a knoivl- edge of the language implied a study of the litera- ture. This is abundantly proven by the discovery among the tablets of a couple inscribed with a Babylonian myth, which was written in Babylon, and apparently used as a text-book in Egypt. The two kings, eleven of whose letters sent to the Egyptian kings have been recovered, were KA-DASHMAN-BEL AND BURNABURIASH. The former corresponded with Amenophis III., the latter with his successor, Amenophis IV. It is possible that they were brothers and that the younger overthrew the elder. The letters give no information of great national occurrences. They relate chiefly to marriages between the royal houses. The Pharaohs have taken Babylonian princesses to their harem, but to their Babylonian friends they are not so generous with their own daugh- 80 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ters — princesses, at least, could not be given to Babylonians. It would require the pen of a Mark Twain to deal adequately with one point that bulks large in these letters, viz., the presents. The Babylonian king, like other kings, evinces in his persistent demands upon the Pharaoh all the characteristics of the haksheesh-hQggmg Oriental. That which he sends is always declared to be trivial — the gold that he gets is tested in the purifying fires of the crucible and found wanting, and more and better is demanded. From the historical point of view the relation of these two old centres of civilization to one another disclosed by the letters is more important. Babylonia (and even Mitani) sends as presents such products of her industry as artificially wrought lapis lazuli, so highly favored in Baby- lon. Egypt, on the contrary, sends gold. It seems almost as if diplomatic dealings were intrusted to oral explanation and argument and the astuteness of well bribed court officials, for political questions are rarely touched upon. Let- ters reflect the life of a people. Even kings engaged in trade, and, it seems, were exempt from customary taxation. Business men from Babylon, who were in the king's service, appear in Akko, where, apparently, they are about to embark for Egypt, when suddenly they are arrested and maltreated for reasons unknown. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 81 The Babylonian king demands of Pharaoh the immediate release of the men and indemnification as well, since Akko lies within the latter 's terri- tory. In only one instance does a political dis- pute arise. At the expense of Babylon plans for territorial expansion had been formed by the Assyrian king, Ashur-uballit, and these were recognized at the Egyptian court of Amenophis III. and support promised. Burnaburiash pro- tested against this procedure on the ground that Assyria was a vassal state under him and, there- fore, could not be treated with independently. He pointed to the conduct of his father, Kurigalzu, who, when he had been urged by Canaanite sub- jects of Egypt to join them in an uprising against her, had promptly declined to participate in the plot. But in Egypt too much confidence was not placed in the ardent friend of Egyptian gold, and his assurances of loyalty can scarcely have been accepted with unquestioning faith. When the Phoenician princes wished in their rivalry to dis- credit one another at the Egyptian court they were wont to raise the cry of treason, and to declare that their rivals were intriguing with the king of Mitani, of the Hittites, or of Kash, i.e., the Kassites of Babylon. The situation referred to in the case of Kurigalzu is exactly the same as we meet with again in the time of Sargon and Merodach-baladan II. The Canaanites asked the 82 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA support of the Babylonians against Egypt, and urged them to unite with them in their designs against her. On the other hand, Merodadi- baladan sent his ambassadors to Hezekiah^ to induce him to join forces against Assyria. Later Taharka and Sennacherib, Nebuchadrezzar and Necho (and in 587 Hophra) constituted the sup- port and hope of the Canaanite states. As a matter of fact we have evidence that shortly afterward, when the death of Amenophis was followed by disturbances in Egypt, Babylonia attempted to regain the West. Despite the anxiety manifested in the letter of Burnaburiash to Amenophis IV. over the territorial seizures of Assyria, and the fact that he waged wars with her, he married his son Karaindash 11.^ to the daughter of the energetic Assyrian king, Ashur- uballit. Her son KADASHMAN-KHARBE succeeded to the throne, a fact which shows the influence of Assyria. It was under him that Baby- lonia sought to regain a firm foothold in the West. At this time Assyria had a strong grasp of Meso- 12 Ki. 20, 12; Isa. 39. 2 This was doubtless the name of the father of Kadashman- kharbe. He is once called in the synchronistic history Kara-fcter- dash, the scribe having misread his original, which, as this proves, was written the same as that of Chronicle P which also has in not khar. The two signs are very similar in this document, and in another passage the same sign was read in. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 83 potamia and this compelled Babylonia to send her army straight through the Syrian desert. Kadashman-Kharbe sought to make the desert road secure by chastising the nomad tribes which roamed there and which were called the Suti. He made wells, and also erected military posts and settlements and filled them with Babylonians. He thus established a highway of communication with the West and made the circuitous route through Mesopotamia unnecessary. This scion of the Assyrian house was apparently a determined opponent of Assyria such as later was never lack- ing. It is possible that his plans were based upon what previously existed. At all events, he recog- nized that the wisest course was to satisfy his threatening rival with territory still to be con- quered and, in the meantime, to deprive it of value by diverting from it the trade so important for Babylonia. Therein lay the solution of the dis- puted question of the time as to who should possess Mesopotamia. Kadashman-Kharbe might have come to a peaceful understanding with Assyria about the determination of the territory which affected both their interests if his plans had succeeded, and thus have proved his ability to strengthen his power by mightier weapons than those of war, especially where industrial Baby- lonia was face to face with the military power, Assyria. 84 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA SHUZIGASH Kadashman-Kharbe cannot have reigned long. He was murdered in an insurrection excited by the Kassites, but we are not informed what was the immediate motive of the act. At bottom it was possibly due to the fact that the kings and the ruling classes of the Kassites had, in the mean- while (after 1400), become Babylonians in all essential respects. The Kassites who at the distri- bution of spoil came off empty-handed, or who had lost their share through the accidents of busi- ness or industrial life, formed a party of mal- contents who longed for the old times when the Kassite was lord and the Babylonian was plun- dered. We find, at least, that the insurrectionists raised a man of common origin to the throne, who is called in the two chronicles Shuzigash and Nazibugash, "the son of nobody." To Ashur- uballit, the grandfather of Kadashman-Kharbe, who was still active on the throne of Assyria, this was a welcome incentive to secure the upper hand by the extension of his kingdom. As the avenger of his grandson and the restorer of order he appeared in Babylon, quelled the insurrection, and placed his great-grandson, KURIGALZU, while still in his minority, upon the throne. But the might of circumstance is stronger than THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 85 the bonds of relationship and good deeds of doubtful intention. As long as Ashur-uballit lived, and during the reign of his son, Assyria continued to struggle for possession of Mesopo- tamia. But when Adad-nirari I. drove out thence the Mitani, and long after Kadashman-Kharbe 's undertakings had proved abortive, Babylon saw her opportunity again to gain Mesopotamia and thus insure her connection with the West. As Assyria was now in possession of it war broke out between her and Babylon. The clash of arms between the two states began in the reigns of Kurigalzu and Adad-nirari I. We have an interesting bit of information of a war waged by the Babylonian, Kurigalzu, against Khurbatila, the king of Elam, in which he worsted and took prisoner the latter on Babylonian soil. Elam was, therefore, the invader. Kurigalzu must have followed up his victory. On the reverse of an inscription dedicated, by a subject of Dungi of the ancient dynasty of Ur, to the goddess Nana of Erech appears a dedication of Kurigalzu 's as follows: "Kurigalzu, king of Karduniash,^ cap- tured the palace of the city of Shasha^ in Elam, and presented this tablet to Belit (the god of Nippur) for his life." This tablet was, accord- ingly, carried off at some time from Erech by Elamites, and now on this victorious expedition 1 Kassite name of Babylon. ' i.e., Susa? or Shushan. 86 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of Kurigalzu's against Elam, found again in a temple/ more than 1200 years after it was dedi- cated in Erech. Then it was rediscovered a few years ago by the American expedition, and brought to Constantinople. Books are not the only things that have their fate ! These wars prove that the conditions already exist which are always apparent in the future; Babylonia is the prize coveted by both Assyria and Elam. For the present she is able to cope with both, and, if at times worsted, at others she proves superior. The contest is waged through the following centuries to the fall of Assyria. In later times Babylonia was a vassal state of the one or the other. Even at this time the same shifting of national fortune can be traced. Soon after Kurigalzu, as we shall see in the history of Assyria, Babylonia and Babylon fell into the hands of Tukulti-Ninib, king of Assyria. Not long before, during the year and a half that NADIN-SHUM reigned, Kidin-Khutrutash, king of Elam, invaded Babylonia and laid waste Dur-ilu, the Babylonian city situated on the western terminus of the high- way from Elam. He then conquered Nippur, which was especially favored by the Kassite • If the Elamite temple was in Susa it was doubtless the temple of the goddess Shushinak mentioned by Ashurbanipal. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 87 kings, and where, doubtless, at times they chose to reside. A similar expedition was undertaken by the Elamite during the reign of the second suc- cessor of the Babylonian king, ADAD-SHUM-IDDIN, who was enthroned by Tnkulti-Ninib. This time it was Isin that suffered. Many an elegiac verse mourns in the tone of the penitential psalms the devastation of the land and especially of certain cities. In the centuries of Babylonian history the same thing, it is true, frequently occurred. But these songs of lament suit this period admirably, and if they did not originate then they are revi- sions of older ones which now resounded in the temples of Babylon. The remaining kings of the . dynasty ruled for the most part under the protec- tion of Elam. It is clear that we have again come to the end of a period. The Kassites have long ago become Babylonians and now have played their role on the stage of history — the Kassite dynasty draws to a close. There remain only four kings, and MARDUK-APLU-IDDIN, Merodach-baladan I., was the only one of these who appears to have successfully opposed Assyria and asserted himself over Mesopotamia. The change of the dynasties indicates, as always, a time of tumult and weakness, and brings to 88 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA the throne a royal line whose work it is to with- stand Assyria and renew the struggle for Mesopo- tamia. The American expedition at Nippur has proved that this city of "the Lord of Lands," Bel-Mdtate, was especially favored by the Kassites. This may have been due to some similarity that existed between their national cult and that of Nippur. They had a strong predilection for names com- pounded with buriash,^ that is, Bel-Matate. On the other hand, we may, perhaps, discern therein efforts intended to counteract the preponderating influence of Babylonia which had been greatly strengthened by the dynasty of Khammurabi. It was necessary for it to overcome Nippur since it rose to power over the dynasties of Isin and Larsa. But the "kings of Isin" also appear to have attributed the same importance to Nippur as the Kassites. The thirty-six Kassite kings, so far as they can be determined at present, and the most impor- tant events of their time are the following: Gandish. His name appears also as Gaddash, and Gande, on a fragment and votive tablet, reigned 16 years. Agum-shi (an abbreviated name) , his son, reigned 22 years. Gu-YASHi (otherwise read Bibe-yashi) reigned 22 years. ^e.g., Buma-buriash, "'servant of the Lord of Lands"; Nimgirali- buriash, "a Saviour is the Lord of Lands"; Ulam-buriash, "sprout of the Lord of Lands"; Kadashman-buriash, "my protection is the Lord of Lands"; Nazi-buriash, "shadow of the Lord of Lands." THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 89 UsHSHi [otherwise read Dushi, Abu {ad) shi] reigned 8 (?) years. Adu-metash reigned — years. Tashi-gueumash reigned — years. Agum-kakrime, successor of preceding (p. 72), reigned — years. . . . lacuna. Kaeaindash I., belongs to a new family (?); the beginning of relations with Egypt ; alliance with Assyria, reigned — years. . . . lacuna, one or more kings, reigned — years. BuBNA-BTjRiASH I., Contemporary of Amenophis III., compact with Puzur-Ashur of Assyria relative to cer- tain territory, reigned — years. KuRiGALZu I., relations with Egypt under Amenophis III., and with Assyria under Ashur-nadin-akhi, reigned — years. Kadashman-bel, brother of preceding; correspondence with Amenophis III., with whose death the end of his reign practically synchronizes. There is extant a copy of an inscription of his that was made by the scribes of Ashurbanipal's library, which contains the dedication of a wagon to Bel of Nippur, reigned — years. BuRNA-BURiASH II., son of Kurigalzu I.; he wrested the throne from his predecessor, maintained a friendly correspondence with Amenophis IV. Four of these letters are now in the British Museum, and two in Berlin. Ashur-nadin-akhi, contemporary king of Assyria, extends his dominions, reigned — years. Kara-indash II., son of Burna-buriash II., married Muballitat-sherua, the daughter of Ashur-muballit. Bel-nirari and Pvdu-ilu, probably ruling in Assyria, reigned — years. 90 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Kadashman-Kharbe I., the son of Karaindash 11. , and Muballitat-sherua, attempts to establish communica- tion with the West by repressing the Suti and opening the way through the Syrian desert inasmuch as Meso- potamia is in the hands of the Mitani. In a rebeUion, probably incited by Kassite distrust of Assyrian influ- ence, he was murdered. Reigned — years. Shuzigash, or Nazibugash, was placed on the throne by the rebels; deposed and killed by Ashuruballit. Reigned — years. KuRiGALZu II., son of Kadashman-Kharbe, who was yet a child, was appointed in his stead by his great-grand- father, Ashur-uballit. Appears to have had a long reign. War with Khurbatila of Elam; Bel-nirari, Pvdu-ilu, Adad-nirari I., his contemporaries in Assy- ria. Reigned — ' years. Nazi-maruttash, son of the preceding. War with Adad- nirari I., over territory on the east of the Tigris; de- feated by Adad-nirari. Reigned 26 years. Kadashman-turgu; Adad-nirari I. rules in Assyria, and now after expelling the Mitani from Mesopota- mia and causing the retreat of Babylonia, he takes possession. Shalmaneser I. , a contemporary. Reigned 17 years. Kadashman-buriash waged war with Shalmaneser I., chiefly over Mesopotamia. Reigned 2 years. Kudur-Bel reigned 6 years. Shagarakti-Shuriash, contemporary of Shalmaneser 1. Reigned 13 years. ' In Winckler's Untersuchungen zur Alt-orientalische Geschichte, s. 146, where the king-list "b" is published in the original, the number 22 is plainly written before the lacuna where the name of Kurigalzu II. should appear. — Craig. THIRD DYNASTY OF BABYLON 91 BiTiLiASHXJ,' son of Shagarakti-Shuriash, succeeded. About this time Tukulti-Ninib, King of Assyria, in- vaded Babylonia and conquered Babylon. Reigned 8 years. Bel-nadin-shum I.'' During his reign Kidin-Khutrutash, the King of Elam, invaded Babylonia, took the cities of Nippur and Dur-ilu, wasted the land, and deported many of the inhabitants. Reigned 1 year, 6 months. Kadashman-Kharbe II. In his reign Babylon was in turn conquered by the Assyrian King, Tukulti-Ninib, under whose supremacy Kadashman-Kharbe contin- ued to rule. Reigned 1 year, 6 months. Adad-shum-iddin. In the early part of his reign he was apparently deposed by the Elamite king, Kidin- Khutrutash, and after he had succeeded in regain- ing the throne, probably with the aid of Assyria, the Elamites again overran the country. Isin was spoiled and Nippur, Babylon, and other cities plundered. The hymns of the time lament the desolation wrought. About the same time the Assyrian power was overthrown by a rebellion in Babylonia, and Tukulti-Ninib lost his hfe in an insurrection in Assyria under the leadership of his son. Thus the two reigns ended contemporaneously. Reigned 6 years. Adad-shitm-utsur ascended the throne and reigned 30 years. »In the "king-list" the name is abbreviated to Bitil, or Bibe, as others, who read the full name Bibeyashu, would transliterate it. — Craig. ' Or Bel-shum-iddin. The object more commonly stands before the verb. — Craig. 92 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Melishikhu.' This was a time of weakness and unrest in Assyria which was followed by fresh attacks by Baby- lonia. Reigned 15 years. Merodach-baladan I. took Mesopotamia; Ninib-apal- Ekur and Ashurdan ruled in Assyria. Reigned 13 years. Zamama-shum-iddin. Ashurdan invaded Babylonia and plundered three of its cities. Elamites attack Baby- lonia and Bel-nadin-shum was dethroned. Kudur- nakhundi the son of the king' of Elam was placed on the throne and wasted Babylonia. Reigned 1 year. Bel-nadin-akhe. Babylon subject to the over-lordship of Elam. Later there appears to have arisen a conflict with Elam. Bel-nadin-akhe was apparently forced to turn to Assyria, but failed to receive the necessary support. Contemporary of Ashurdan. Reigned 3 years. According to a summary item in one of the king- lists this Kassite dynasty had 36 kings and lasted five hundred and seventy-six years and nine months from cir. 1700 to 1130. ' Kassite compound=Arad-Marduk "servant of the god Marduk" in Babylonian. — Craig. 2 His name is not given. If it was not Kidirir-Khutrutash it must have been Shutur-nakhunde from whom, and his son, Kutur-nakhunde, we have inscriptions from Elam. It is possible that it was the Elamite who ruled after the dynasty of Bazi (p. 98) and who is said in chronicle S to have been a descendant {lip-pal-paD of Shviur- {nakhunde). CHAPTER X THE DYNASTY OF PASHE/ CIR. 1130-1000 The following dynasty is called in the king-lists the dynasty of Pashe, the name of a quarter of Babylon. Nebuchadrezzar I., the prosperous king of this dynasty, expressly speaks of himself as the offspring of Babylon. It is, therefore, clear that this line of kings lays claim to national origin. It consisted of 11 kings who held the throne of Babylon for 132 years. The conditions which brought the new house into power, as we may gather from the picture of the times, so far as they are at present discernible, are what we had reason to expect. As at the end of the Kassite dominion, the conflicts with Elam and Assyria were continued and the struggle for the recovery of Mesopotamia, or for sovereign rights there, was renewed. Of the first two or three kings of the dynasty we have no information whatever, except that the first ruled 17 years and the second 6 years. The third 2 or fourth king, 1 Pa-She. ^ Hilprecht, Old Bab. Inscr. I. Pt. i., 38 ff. argues, inconclusively however, that Nebuchadrezzar was the first king of this dynasty, and Rogers, Hist. Bab. and Ass., I., 426, states that he was the sixth; but the inconclusive data do not favor so late a succession. — Craig. 93 94 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA NEBUCHADREZZAR I., waged victorious war with Elam and acquired possession of Mesopotamia and the Westland. He extended once again, and for the last time, the sovereignty of Babylon to the shores of the Mediterranean. The war with Elam proves that -1 the pitiful condition of affairs that obtained when Kidin-Khutrutash attacked Babylonia had grown worse under Nebuchadrezzar's predecessors and the last of the Kassite kings. Even the statue of the god Marduk had been carried off in triumph to Elam. It may be that this occurred at the time of the deposition of Bel-nadin-akhe and was, therefore, connected with the change of dynasty. The deportation of the god implied the loss of national independence and degradation to a state of vassalage. Just as Marduk had now to do obeisance in the temple of a foreign god, so the Babylonian ruler was no longer a king, but only a servant of the Elamite sovereign. As long as the divine statue was absent from Babylon Nebu- chadrezzar, therefore, did not call himself king but only governor. It was not until he had recovered the statue of Marduk, which presup- poses a decisive victory over Elam, that he took the title "king of Babylon." The statue had been in captivity thirty years. The length of his reign corresponded, accordingly, with the thirty years THE DYNASTY OF PASHE 95 after the close of the Kassite dynasty. Hymns lamenting the absence of Marduk from Babylon and celebrating his return have been preserved for us. Whatever the outcome of this victory may have been it is at least evident that for some time a check was put upon the advance of Elam. Our further knowledge of events connected with this dynasty is gleaned from sources which tell of the wars with Assyria. In the history of Assyria we shall see that the success of Nebuchadrezzar's reign continued to exert an influence long after, and that the advantages gained by Assyria, which paved the way for the conquest of Babylon by Tiglathpileser I., were not enduring. The list of the kings of the Pashe dynasty may be restored, in some instances provisionally, in others with reasonable assurance, with the help of the king-lists and other available documentary sources, as follows : Marduk-akhi-irba(?). The name is broken off. Ashur- dan, king of Assyria and probably vassal of Elam. Reigned 17 ' (?) years. NiNiB-NADiN-AKHi, the father of Nebuchadrezzar I.(?). Mutakkil-Nusku, probably as vassal of Elam, reigned in Assyria 6 years. Nebuchadrezzar I. takes possession of Mesopotamia. Ashur-resh-ishi contemporary in Assyria. Reigned — years. Bel-nadin-apli. Mesopotamia lost to Assyria. Reigned — years. 1 King-list, Winckler, U. zur. or. Gesch. S. 146, gives 17.— Craig. 96 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Marduk-nadin-akhi. Wars with Tiglathpileser I. and regains Mesopotamia. Reigned — years. Marduk-shapik-zer-mati, a contemporary of Ashur-bel- kala, during whose reign he died. Reigned — years. Adad-aplu-iddin, "the son of a nobody," raised to the throne. Ashur-bel-kala marries his daughter. If three Kings preceded Nebuchadrezzar I., Adad-aplu-iddin would occupy the seventh position. Reigned 22 years. Marduk-nadin-shum reigned 1 year, 6 months. Marduk-zir' reigned 13 years. The length of reigns appended above are taken from the king-list ''b," and nothing more than this has come down to us with respect to the close of the dynasty. ' The reading zir is more probable than Mu, otherwise we might place here Marduk-nadin-shum. His name appears upon an orna- ment from Babylon with the title Shar kishshati. He cannot, therefore, be the Marduk-nadin-shum appointed by Shalmaneser 11., but, doubtless, belongs to this dynasty. CHAPTER XI THE ELAMITES AS RULERS OF BABYLON, CIR. 1000 The following years witnessed frequent changes in the ruling houses, but little information has come down to us of the progress of events in Babylonia and Assyria. The king-lists and a very brief chronicle furnish us with the following facts : Shibar'-Shikhu, "the son of Erba-Sin of the dynasty of Damiq-Marduk was murdered and buried in the palace of Sargon." Reigned 17 years. Ea-mukin-Shum reigned 5 (or 3) months. Kashshu-nadin-akhe reigned 3 (or 6) years. These three kings are assigned to the dynasty of The Sea-Land, that is, the land about the mouth of the two rivers on the Persian Gulf. We learn from a late document that they repaired the tem- ple of the sun-god at Sippar which had been partly destroyed by the Suti. This is the same people whom we have already met with as nomad tribes • It is more than doubtful that this is the correct reading. Both elements in the name as read here are Kassite names of deities. In both the king-list and chronicle the first sign in the name is Nam which is glossed in the texts as, Sim (si-im), and since Simmash is the Kassite for lidanv^" ohM," the name should be read Simmash- shikhu=in Assyrian "child of Marduk." — Craig. 97 98 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of the Syrian desert in tlie time of Kadashman- Kharbe I. (p. 90). They still continue to make inroads into Babylonia as they did shortly before, and to menace even the cities. We are confronted, as it appears, with a part of a new immigration. This is the most important fact which the record yields, and it is readily explained by the presence of foreign rulers in Babylon. As regards the nationality of these three kings it is to be observed that the first and third names reflect a lingering ray of the glory of the Kassite dominion, which accordingly must have maintained itself longest in the South. THE DYNASTY OF BAZI, CIR. 985 The next three kings are designated in the king- lists and chronicle as the Dynasty of Basi, a bor- der district of Elam. Their names and the length of their reigns are given as follows : E-dubar-Shuqamuna reigned 17 (or 15) years. NiNiB-KUDUR-UTSUR reigned 3 (or 2) years. Shilani-Shuqamuna reigned 3 months. Following upon these one king appears in a dynasty by himself — and he is an Elamite. We thus see that Babylonia was in a state of decline and the prey of every foreign invader. The Elamites were her most aggressive enemy when not held in check by Assyria. The period which these three dynasties lasted extends from ELAMITES AS RULERS OF BABYLON 99 about 1000 to 960. At the end of this time Assyria, that heretofore had. been impotent to act, begins anew her conquests. Who it was that wrested the power from Elam, or what was effected by a new dynasty, we have no means of knowing. The king-hsts are broken off at this point and we are forced to revert to Assyrian sources for almost all that we can learn until about 750. From these, however, we can see distinctly what was the dominant force of the time even though the history of the separate reigns cannot be written. CHAPTEE XII ,THE CHALDEANS Babylonia, which had been the coveted spoil of the two great kingdoms of Assyria and Elam, is now overrun by a great tide of immigration simi- lar to the hordes of Semites who had settled there previously, and in the course of centuries had be- come completely naturalized. These newcomers were compelled to struggle with varying fortunes for possession of the land. The progress of events may be best illustrated by comparing them with the occupation of Palestine by the Hebrews. From now on the Chaldeans press forward into Baby- lonia and seek to make themselves masters of the cities. Later ages have much to say of the Chaldeans, and numerous details of information respecting their relation to Babylonia have come down to us. But, despite all this, it still remains impossi- ble to draw for ourselves a satisfactory picture of their national life. All the Chaldeans who are known to us bear Babylonian names. No new ele- ment of speech seems to have been introduced into the Babylonian language by their arrival, so that we have no particular data by which we can deter- mine their racial connections. Nevertheless, on 100 THE CHALDEANS 101 general grounds, since they undoubtedly issued from the South and first settled in the regions bordering on the Persian Gulf, we must look upon them as Semites who in the first instance came from Eastern Arabia. The previous migrations had been from the West, and Mesopotamia and North Babylonia were the first entered in their line of movement. The Chaldean migration would, accordingly, fall between the Aramaic and Arabian, and in these two groups the Chaldean would find its closest kin, or, perhaps, it is to be connected with one or the other. If they were Semites the rapidity with which they adapted themselves to the Babylonian conditions would be explained. The similarity of their languages would facilitate intercourse, and, as we know, Aramaic tribes had already poured into Baby- lonia. With this attempt to envisage the situation the scant material which exists for a characteriza- tion of the Chaldeans is in perfect accord. The designation of Ur, the city of the moon-god, as KafiaptvT], is probably to be traced to Berosus, and this cannot be explained from any other lan- guage than Arabic in which qamar means moon. The chiefs of the Chaldeans are called ra'sani, which is the Arabic for chiefs (Hebrew ra'sMm). The only god whose cult may have been intro- duced by the Chaldeans is the war-god, designated Girra, whom Nabopolassar, Nebuchadrezzar and 102 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Neriglissar especially exalt. This would indicate that among the Chaldeans, or, at least, in the tribe of Nabopolassar, he was the chief god. From this time forward we find in addition to a number of Aramaic tribes also a number of petty Chaldean kingdoms, or tribes, each of which is designated by the Babylonians and Assyrians as "house" (bit) of a princely family. Thus we have Bit-Yakin, the "Sea-Land," whose Kassite ruler, as we have just seen, occupied the throne of Babylon after he had been carried forward possi- bly by the new movement. Bit-Sa'alli, Bit- Khilani, Bit-Amukkani, Bit-Adini, Bit-Dakuri, in close proximity to Babylon and Borsippa, are among the most important of the others. The one aim of the princes of these "houses" was to get possession of the larger cities and, to crown their achievements, ascend the throne of Babylon. Chaldea enters now as the third contestant by the side of Assyria and Elam for Babylonian sover- eignty, and the Babylonian people grew less and less able to assert their independence. An unsta- ble condition of affairs was the natural outcome. In general the Chaldeans and Elamites were more closely united, whereas the Assyrian kings posed rather as the protectors of national independence, or of what they would have dignified by this phrase. The usual successes and reverses of war attended this struggle until, finally, with the fall THE CHALDEANS 103 of Assyria, the Chaldeans reached their goal, and Babylon once more, under a Chaldean dynasty, rose to the rank of a powerful kingdom. Our knowledge of the period before Assyria regained control in Babylonia is limited, and almost wholly confined to records of war between the two states. The first king of the dynasty was, perhaps, NABU-KIN-APLI, CIR. 960, who reigned, at least, twenty-six years. One docu- ment of his age appears to ascribe to him the rule over Mesopotamia, about 960. He would, in that case, be the last who was able to boast of this supremacy. In that same period, and continu- ously from that time forward, the Assyrian kings claimed the title to sovereignty there. The name of Nabu-kin-apli's successor is missing on the king-lists, but he is there said to have ruled six months and twelve days. A gap in the lists then follows until we reach the name of Nabu- natsir, who began to reign in 747. There are possibly two other royal names to be supplied after Nabu-kin-apli, which we cannot discover from other sources. The next king, SHAMASH-MUDAMMIQ, is known to us from his wars with Assyria in the reign of Adad-nirari II. He died during the conflict. 104 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA NABU-APLU-IDDIN, ?-854, reigned at least thirty-one years, and died in 854. He came into conflict with Ashurnatsirpal and Shalmaneser, and sought during the reign of the former to advance along the Euphrates into Mesopotamia. In the year 879 he lent support to the princes of Sukhi, which was situated along the Euphrates and was under Babylonian influ- ence, in their opposition to Assyria. But Ashur- natsirpal defeated the Babylonian contingent. From the manner in which he speaks of this vic- tory it would appear that Nabu-aplu-iddin was a Chaldean. It is quite consonant with this that he seems especially desirous, in an inscription which relates to the restoration of the temple at Sippar, to put himself on record as a good Babylonian. During his reign Assyria refrained from overt acts against Babylonia. Ashurnatsirpal contented himself with Mesopotamia, but later he appears to have spread out toward .North Babylonia and to have taken possession of the former "kingdom of the Four Quarters of the World. ' ' MARDUK-NADIN-SHUM, 854-823. In 854 Nabu-aplu-iddin died. Death, by the way, is one of the commonest occurrences in the Orient, and his was the occasion for a determined conflict between his sons Marduk-nadin-shum and THE CHALDEANS 105 MarduJc-h el-US ati for the throne. Babylonia was divided between them, probably in agreement with their father's disposition, so that North Babylonia and Babylon fell to the former. South Babylonia, and therewith the motherland of Chaldea, to the latter. "War between the Chaldean princes and the Babylonian king, as might be expected, broke out immediately, and, as usual, the forces of the Chaldeans proved more than a match for those of the North. Marduk-nadin-shum then turned for assistance to Shabnaneser II., king of Assyria, and thereby invoked the suzerainty of the latter. The ultima thule of Assyrian politics was the establishment of sovereignty over Babylonia and, naturally enough, Shalmaneser responded to Marduk-nadin-shum 's invitation with foreboding alacrity. He poured his seasoned and disciplined troops into the country, and Marduk-bel-usati's "Chaldean peasants" fled to the marshlands for refuge. Shalmaneser entered the Babylonian cities, offered up the sacrifices as lord-paramount over the country, and received the homage of the Chaldean princes. Marduk-nadin-shum reigned from 854 to cir. 823 under Assyrian suzerainty. North Babylonia, the "kingdom of the Four Quarters of the World," which from the time of Ashurnatsirpal had been under Assyrian domina- tion, had, as a matter of course, been subject to Shalmaneser from the beginning. It appears, 106 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA indeed, that at the end of his reign, when he was forced to flee Assyria, by the insurrection headed by his son, Ashur-danin-pal, he turned for sup- port to this part of his kingdom, and that his son, Shamshi-Adad, used it and Mesopotamia as his base in subjugating Assyria. The impossibility during this time of making a serious attack upon Babylonia must have given the ever envious Chaldean another welcome oppor- tunity to push northward. As soon, therefore, as Shamshi-Adad was free from the assaults of more pressing enemies he turned toward Babylonia. Marduk-nadin-shum, who outlived the beginning of the reign of Shamshi-Adad, as is witnessed by a text in which their names appear together, died, or was deposed, in 823. The next to ascend the throne was MARDUK-BALATSU-IQBI, 823-?, a Chaldean prince, who was supported by the Kaldi, Babylonian Aramaean tribes, Elam and Median peoples, especially the "Namri." He owed his throne, therefore, to Elamite assistance, and consequently stood in the same relation to Elam as Marduk-nadin-shum did to Assyria. This is the first time that we discover clearly the relations sustained by Babylonia to its neigh- bors, relations which we meet with again and again — Ashur, or Elam as suzerain of Babylonia with her king under their protection. THE CHALDEANS 107 ShamsM-Adad 's inscription does not record his success; but it informs us of expeditions under- taken in 813 and 812 against Chaldea and Babylon. The first of these presupposes the subjugation of the Chaldean king by Assyria, and, therewith, the restoration of Assyrian supremacy. The second took place during the first year of Adad-nirari III. It is possible, as so often happened, that the change of rulers offered to the Chaldeans, who were but partially conquered, an opportune moment for a forward movement. BAU-AKHI-IDDIN, ?-785, appears to have been king of Babylon at this time. He was besieged and taken prisoner by the Assyri- ans, and as Shalmaneser had previously offered up his sacrifices in the cities, so Adad-nirari did now as supreme lord. It is uncertain whether all this occurred in 812, or in the later expeditions of 796 and 795 against North Babylonia and that of 791 against Chaldea, the issues of which are unknown. This much, however, is established, viz., that the characteristic note of the time is: the attempts of Chaldean princes, with the assist- ance of Elani, to obtain the throne of Babylon, and the superiority of Assyria when not engaged in other quarters. But with every change of rulers, or whenever Assyria was involved elsewhere, a fresh blow for independence was struck. The 108 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA same acts in the historical drama are played upon every stage, and are best attested in the prophets of Jndah and Israel : Two great parties at home turning for aid to two rival powers abroad and a constant vacillation between the two. We cannot determine when Adad-nirari as- cended the throne of Babylon, neither have we any information of the time which immediately followed. This is due to the reverse of Assyrian power after Adad-nirari 's reign and the loss of influence upon Babylonia which accompanied it. But Assyria did not relinquish her claim to supremacy without a struggle, for several expedi- tions against Chaldea are attested, for example, immediately after in 783 and 782 with the acces- sion of Shalmaneser III., and again under him in 777. So, also, his successor, Ashur-dan, imme- diately after he ascended the throne in 771 marched against North Babylonia and two years later against Chaldea. The explanation of this is to be found in the previous history, and we can picture the course of events in the light of the expeditions of Shalmaneser and Adad-nirari. But since we have no inscriptions of the Assyrian kings referred to, and only brief references in the "chronicles" none of the names of. the Babylonian kings of this period are known. Three of them are probably lacking in our sources. One of them THE CHALDEANS 109 may have been eeba-marduk, who is mentioned by Marduk-apal-iddin II. as his ancestor.^ In the tumultuous time which now succeeded Assyrian influence must have been utterly lost, and as a result Babylonia fell into the hands of the Chaldeans. From the Babylonian king-lists we learn that the next king who ruled in Baby- lonia was NABU-SHUM-ISHK(UN?), ?-748. He ruled until 748. If the restoration of the name is correct we have an inscription which furnishes us with a clear picture of prevailing Babylonian conditions. Nabu-shum-imbi, the governor of Borsippa, the sister city of Babylon, in an account of the building operations connected with the tem- ple of Nebo relates as follows : "When there arose in Borsippa, the city of justice and order, tumult, devastation, riot and revolution, during the reign of Nabu-shum-ishkun of Bit-Dakuri, then the Babylonians, the people of Borsippa, and Dush- ulti from the shore of the Euphrates, all the Chal- deans, Aramaeans, Dilbateans (from a Babylonian city) turned against one another in arms, smote one another and fought with the people of Bor- sippa over their boundary. And Nabu-shum-iddin (a high official of the temple of Nebo) worked up 1 The name of the first of these kings appears from the traces to have begun with Marduk, and the second cannot have been Erha- Marduk on account of the shortness of the second reign, only 8 months and 12 days. 110 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA independently (a revolt) against Nabu-slium-imbi, the governor of Borsippa. At night, like a thief, enemy, bandit, etc., he collected them and led them into the temple of Nebo. . . . They raised a tumult. But the people of Borsippa and others who rendered assistance surrounded the house of the governor and defended it with bows and arrows. ' ' We have here revealed what was to be expected, the king of Babylon is a Chaldean of the Dakuri tribe, and the Chaldeans and Ara- maeans take possession of the regions about the cities which are divided by opposing factions within them. It was but natural that under these conditions the property-holding classes should greet the appearance of an Assyrian king as a deliverer, as they often did later on. Chaldean rule meant anarchy for Babylonia. The divisions of the Chaldeans among themselves, and the natural opposition of their ambitious projects to that of the city population in actual possession prevented the appearance of a strong Chaldean prince and settled conditions. To speak of an orderly, well-organized state constitution would be wide of the mark. The land again lay open for conquest as so often before and afterward. NABU-NATSIR, 747-734, or as the Ptolemaic Canon gives his name, Nabo- nassar, was the next king. He reigned from 747 THE CHALDEANS 111 to 734. The condition of affairs just described continued to exist under Mm. The lawless state that existed in Borsippa, as described by Nabu- shum-imbi, led to an attempt on the part of Bor- sippa during the reign of Nabu-natsir to cut loose from Babylon. This was met by determined oppo- sition on the part of the king. Little more remains to be said of Nabu-natsir 's deeds. Only one statement which rests upon Berosus, the Baby- lonian historiographer who lived in the Selucid age, affirms that he issued a decree for the introduction of a new era. And, in fact, the Ptolemaic Canon, and a Babylonian chronicle written in the time of Darius, begin with his reign in 747. It was the Ptolemaic Canon that made his name known. From that time on all astronomy, and therewith all scientific Assyriology of an- tiquity, reckoned a new era from the beginning of his reign. The occasion for the change was brought about by the entrance of the vernal equi- nox into the zodiacal sign Aries, whereas it had been from 3000 b.c. in Taurus. The ancients then began to count Aries first in the zodiacal signs, and we still continue to do so although the equi- noctial point is now in Pisces. The change of the era necessitated a change in the calendar, and also in numberless doctrines connected therewith and based thereon. It is upon the introduction of this reform, by which scientific teaching was trans- 112 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA lated into practice, that the importance of Nabu- natsir's reign rests. His change of the calendar was an act of as great importance to antiquity as the introduction of Julian's Calendar was for Rome and the civilized world dependent upon her, or as the Gregorian for the modern world. But for the ancient Orient a reform of the calendar implied an infinitely greater effect upon the intel- lectual and religious life than it would with us. For convenience of reference we add the follow- ing list of kings : Broken off. Reigned 13 years.' Broken off. Reigned 6 months, 12 days. ? ? or, ShamXsh-mudammiq. Nabu-aplxj-iddin, reigned at least 31 years, is mentioned by Ashurnatsirpal in 854. Reigned 885(?)-854. Marduk-nadin-shum reigned 853-829 (?). Marduk-balatsu-iqbi, opponent of Shamshi-Adad. Reigned 823-812(?). Bau-akhi-iddin, conquered by Andad-nirari III. Reigned ?-785. . . . Three other kings, Erba-Marduk one of them? Nabu-shum-(ishkun'? or iqisha?) reigned ?-748. Nabu-natsir, reigned 747-733. ' On p. 103 the author gives 26 years. The 13 years given here is based on an early publication of a king-list. — Craig. ' Rnudtzon read shor-ishkun, and from the traces of the following sign he was the son of his predecessor. — Craig. CHAPTEE XIII BABYLONIA UNDER THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE Nabit-natsie's third year, 745, was the beginning of a new period for Assyria under Tiglathpileser III., and Babylonia soon became aware of the change that took place. The first movement of the new king was into Babylonia where he chas- tized the Aramaeans and the northernmost tribes of the Chaldeans, and, apparently, assumed a pro- tectorship over Nabu-natsir. It is reasonable to conclude from this that the latter was a Baby- lonian and not a Chaldean. Tiglathpileser at once assumed the titles "king of Burner and Akkad" and "king of the Four Quarters of the World," and marched southward as far as Nippur. The Chaldeans, it is to be supposed, promptly submitted. Beyond this, however, he was unable to carry out his plans owing to threatening unrest in Armenia and Syria. Nabu-natsir thus exer- cised rule under the protection of Assyria. Though the insurrection of Borsippa shows that his power did not extend beyond the limits of Babylon, it must be remembered first, that it was not in the interest of Assyria to shield him from 113 114 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA minor troubles, and, secondly, that Tiglathpileser was too busily engaged at first to give himself more concern for Babylon than the exigencies of the situation demanded. It is, nevertheless, an eloquent testimony to the wholesome respect in which he was held that for fourteen years no Chal- dean attempted the reduction of Babylon. In the year 734 Nabu-natsir died. He was succeeded by his son, NABU-NADIN-ZIR, 734-733, or Nadinu, by abbreviation, whence the form Nadios of Ptolemy. Quite in keeping with the times, after he had reigned two years, 734-733, an insurrection broke out. The king was de- throned by a provincial governor, NABU-SHUM-UKIN, a Babylonian, and the leader of the party inimical to Assyria. He held the reins of government only two months, when he was forced to give place to the Chaldean, UKIN-ZIR, 732-730, the "Chinzer" of Ptolemy, the prince of Bit- Amukani. The time had come for Assyria to interfere again, for a Chaldean upon the throne of Babylon could have no other ultimate aim than the conquest of the whole of Babylonia, which up THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 115 to this had been under the control of Tiglath- . pileser III. As soon, therefore, as the latter had squared accounts with Syria, and taken Damascus after a three-years ' siege, during which the throne of Ukin-zir was free from attack, he led his troops into Babylonia. There he besieged Bit-Amukani, Ukin-zir 's native land, together with some other Chaldean principalities, and took Ukin-zir pris- oner. To put a stop to ceaseless disturbances, despite the onerous duty of being present every year at the New Year's ceremony in Babylon, and of residing there when possible to do so, he decided to take the crown of Marduk's kingdom himself. For the two following years of his life Tiglathpileser caused himself to be proclaimed king of Babylon. But the rights of the Baby- lonians had to be maintained. Tiglathpileser, and the other kings who adopted a like policy, ruled as kings in Babylon under other names. Shal- maneser was called in Babylonia Ululai, and Ashurbanipal received the name of Kandalanu. Tiglathpileser appears in the Babylonian lists as PULu, a name by which he is also known in the Old Testament. Peace ruled during these two years, 729 and 728, and during the reign of his successor, Shal- maneser IV., who reigned in Babylon also, under the name of 116 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ULULAI, 727-722. But with his death, when the great revolution occurred which placed Sargon II. upon the throne of Assyria, a Chaldean prince,^ MARDUK-APLU-IDDIN II.,^ 721-710, king of the "Sea-Land," used the opportunity to seize the Babylonian crown with the connivance of Khumbanigash, the king of Elam. Sargon 's troops were quickly turned against him, but the Elamite hastened to render assist- ance. A battle was fought at Dur-ilu, the out- come of which Sargon claims as a victory for himself and the Babylonians over Khumbanigash. Sargon, however, did not succeed in forcing Mero- dach-Baladan to withdraw from Babylon. He nevertheless established his authority over the most northerly part, the region known as "The Four Quarters of the World," including Dur-ilu. Marduk-aplu-iddin calls himself "Jcing of Baby- lon, king of Sumer and AkJcad." He ruled as Marduk-aplu-iddin II., under Elamite protection, from 721 to 710, while Sargon was busily engaged in Syria-Palestine and Armenia, as Tiglathpileser had been shortly before. ' Of the Dynasty of Erba-Marduk, as he is called in an inscription of his reign. 2 Or, as his name appears somewhat incorrectly in the Old Testa- ment, Merodach-Baladan. THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 117 On the termination of these wars Sargon marched on Babylon, and put to flight Marduk- aplu-iddin, who after the loss of Dur-Yahin, his capital in the Sea-Land, sought refuge at the court of Susa. The Assyrian party in Babylon, especially the priesthood, welcomed the invader as savior and restorer of order. Sargon assumed the title of "governor of Babylon," that is, he undertook the post of royal representative, when in fact there was none in name. In this capacity he ruled Babylon and all Babylonia from 709 to 705, when his career was ended by death. The following two years Babylon enjoyed peace, but at the end of this time an insurrection arose which placed MARDUK-ZAKIR-SHUM, 702, upon the throne for one month. Marduk-aplu- iddin immediately seized upon the opportunity presented and set out from Elam, with Elamite support, to recapture Babylon. But his triumph was of short duration. Sennacherib, more for- tunate than his predecessor Sargon, had not his army on other fields and, therefore, appeared before Babylon nine months after Marduk-aplu- iddin's return. The armies met at Kish and the battle turned against Marduk-aplu-iddin and his Elamite allies. He fled again to Elam where he awaited a fresh opportunity. Sennacherib 118 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA adopted a mild policy toward Babylon. It was not, indeed, the Babylonians who were the cause of the trouble, and only the possessions of Mar- duk-aplu-iddin and his supporters were confis- cated. The Chaldeans were driven back into their own territory and the cities were given back the lands which formerly belonged to them. The. Aramaean tribes, likewise, who under similar con- ditions always joined with the Chaldeans, were compelled to fall back to their old domain. Senna- cherib now placed upon the throne of Babylon a scion of a noble family of Babylon who had grown up at the court of Nineveh, vis., BEL-IBNI, 702-700, who reigned from 702 to 700. In the year 702 two provinces bordering on Elam were secured. The force of circumstances, however, ran counter to Bel-ibni's loyalty to Assyria, eveli though he may have had the best of intentions. Senna- cherib's policy of making Nineveh the first city of the Orient may have been apparent. In any case, Bel-ibni was compelled during Sennacherib's engagement in Palestine to cut loose from Assyria and join forces with his own rival, Marduk- aplu-iddin, Mushesih-MarduJc, another Chaldean prince, and Elam; in other words, acknowledge subjection to Elam. This step was, doubtless, not voluntarily taken. However, just as the Pales- THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 119 tinians miscalculated and took the field too late, so now, the Babylonians and Elamites counted amiss. Sennacherib abandoned the siege of Jerusalem after he had conquered the entire land, turned against his ambitious rivals and scattered the hosts of the allied armies in confusion. Marduk- aplu-iddin betook himself and his gods to Elam. The Chaldean, Mushezib-Marduk, fell back upon his desert swamps, and Bel-ibni with his followers had to return whence he came — to the court of Nineveh. From this it appears that he joined Elam and the Chaldeans under compulsion, other- wise he would certainly have suffered a severer punishment. ASHUR-NADIN-SHUM, 699-694, a son of Sennacherib was enthroned in Babylon and ruled from 699-694. Marduk-aplu-iddin must have died soon after, for nothing more is heard of him. Commotions in Elam were now rife, con- sequently peace prevailed for five years in Baby- lonia. In the year 694 Sennacherib advanced against the inhabitants of "The Sea-Land," who had fled with Marduk-aplu-iddin to Elam. They had settled in some of the coast cities and were a constant menace to Babylonia, hence the deter- mination of Sennacherib to drive them out. He gives a detailed description of the work he under- took to effect his purpose — how he built ships and 120 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA brought them to Opis on the Tigris, thence over to the Euphrates and down to the Persian Gulf. He conquered the temptations which may have arisen within himself to dare the dangerous ele- ment, but he transported his army by ship to Elam. It proceeded a short distance up the river Karun (Ulai), devastated the Elamite provinces along the coast, and dispersed, or took prisoners the Chaldean settlers. Wliile the Assyrian army remained here in Elam Khalludush, the king of Elam, was not idle. Marching along the usual military highway he entered Northern Babylonia at Dur-ilu, conquered Sippar, took Ashur-nadin-shum prisoner and deported him to Elam. He appointed in his stead NERGAL-USHEZIB, 694-693, a Babylonian, king of Babylon. Sennacherib tells us only of the courageous face he presented to the threatening sea and of his success in Elam. The counter-stroke of the Elamite we know of only from the Babylonian chronicle. Neither is anything more heard of Sennacherib's deposed son, Ashur-nadin-shum. The new king at first had possession only of Northern Babylonia, but later he attempted to expel the Assyrians from the South also. He conquered Nippur; but Uruk, which appears to have gone over to him, was retaken by the Assyrians, and soon afterward THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 121 the Assyrian forces appeared before Nippur. Nergal-ushezib marclied out and met them in open battle which went against him. He was defeated and taken prisoner. He reigned only one and a half years, from 694-693. While Sennacherib in the same year set out on a war of retaliation against Elam, the Chaldean, MUSHEZIB-MARDUK, 692-689, already mentioned,^ seized the opportunity to establish himself in Babylon, where he continued to rule from 692 to 689. He put himself com- pletely in the hands of Elam and even sacrificed the treasures of the temple of Marduk that he might pay Umman-menanu, the Elamite, his "presents," that is, the price exacted for assist- ance rendered. Here, again, it appears that the priestly party relied on Assyria. Sennacherib did not find it so easy this time to put Elam, the actual foe, to rout. In the year 69 1^ a batttle was waged near Khalule in Northern Babylonia, with Umman-menanu, his vassal Mushezib-Marduk, the son of Marduk-aplu-iddin, and the rest of the Chaldeans. Sennacherib gives a glowing narra- tive of the engagement and naturally claims the 'C/. p. 118. ' Not in 690! The Taylor-prism which gives the account of the battle was written in the limmu (archontat) of Bel-limuranni, i.e., 691. 122 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA victory. The Babylonian chronicle ascribes it to Umman-menanu and, in so doing is, at least, virtually correct, for Sennacherib reaped no advantage from it: Babylon remained under Elamite protection. In 689 Umman-menanu died, and, in the same year, Babylon fell into the hands of Sennacherib, and Mushezib-Marduk was car- ried a prisoner to Assyria. We must infer that the Assyrian party in Babylon at this time was insignificant. It had apparently become clear that Sennacherib's policy aimed at the destruction of the city. Desperation led to a union with the Chaldeans. Sennacherib then hastened to effect his purpose by the quickest means : Babylon was completely demolished and her gods carried to Assyria. The possibility of reinhabiting the ancient city was, therewith, removed for some time. After the destruction of Babylon Nineveh might have become the leading city in the Orient. But it is an easier matter to destroy the products of civilization than to charm them again into exist- ence, and the economical conditions of thousands of years could not with impunity be ignored. For eight years there was "no king in Babylon," as the Babylonian chronicle sadly relates. There was indeed no Babylon. But, when Sennacherib was murdered, the first act of his son Esarhad- don, who succeeded him, and who appears to have THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 123 previously been governor of Babylon/ was to issue a decree commanding the rebuilding of the city and the temple of Marduk. The years that Babylon lay in ruins were naturally used by the Chaldeans of the neighboring Bit-Dakuri to trans- gress the Babylonian boundary. Esarhaddon was obliged to expel them. Descendants of Marduk- aplu-iddin sought alliances with Elam, in the hope of renewing the policy of their ancestor ; but these attempts were also rendered abortive.^ Condi- tions, however, had changed after Sennacherib's death. The latter stood for a purely Assyrian and, therefore, a strong military policy, but Esarhad- don was forced to depend on the priesthood as Sar- gon had been. Thus the reconstruction of Babylon was exactly upon the old lines. Evidently enough the military party did not disappear with the death of Sennacherib, but the condition of affairs in Assyria controlled it. These two strenuous parties appear to have set their hopes for the future upon the two princes Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shum-ukin. We shall see in the history of Assyria how the military party compelled Esarhaddon to crown their head, Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, therewith securing control just as Babylon was ready and was again on the point • It is quite likely that Sennacherib was forced by a Babylonian hierarchic party to give pennission for the rebuilding of Babylon and also to appoint Esarhaddon as governor or royal representative. 2 Cf. under Esarhaddon in Assyrian History. 124 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of occupying the throne of Babylonia. Esar- haddon was able to secure only Babylon and Southern Babylonia to SHAMASH-SHUM-UKIN, 668-648. In the year 668 the statue of Marduk was returned to Babylon and the two princes proclaimed kings of their respective realms while their father still lived. But the old situation still continued^ Babylon stood under Assyrian Over-lordship, and the new king of Assyria offered up sacrifices in Babylon, Sippar and Kutha as the protector of Babylonian deities. Therewith the way was opened for the old rivalries and the outbreak of hostilities was only a question of time. For the first few years the inscriptions of both of them abound with vain expressions of good will and brotherly love, and then the clang of weapons rings out anew. Sha- mash-shum-ukin sought for allies wherever the enemies of Assyria were to be found, and these were rarely lacking wherever her rule was felt or feared. Elam, the Arabians, the lands along the Mediterranean, Gutium (North Countries), he incited to arms against Assyria. In the war which followed the question to be decided was again: Shall Babylon or Assyria dominate the Orient! It was about the middle of the seventh century that the war broke out owing to the refusal of THE NEW ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 125 Shamash-shum-ukin to allow his brother Ashur- banipal to perform the sacrifices which, as pro- tector of Babylonia, he was wont to offer. It ended with a disastrous siege of Sippar, Kutha, and Babylon, and the death of Shamash-shum- ukin, who perished in the flames into which, according to the account of Ashurbanipal, his desperate subjects cast him. In 648 the war came to a close, and Babylonia had suffered enough from it to make peace seem desirable for some time. From 647-626 the Assyrian king, Ashur- banipal, wore the crown of Babylon under the name of KANDALANU, 647-626. His speech, delivered on the occasion of his acces- sion, has come down to us. The successes which he won over Elam prevented the latter from further hostile movements against Babylonia. So the land had rest until he died. But as so often before, so it was now, change of rulers gave opportunity to a Chaldean to grasp the throne of Babylon. From 625 the lists designate NABU-APLU-UTSUR, 625- or, as the name has come down to us through the Greeks somewhat distorted, as other names and facts delivered to us from the same source, Nabo- polassar. He was a Chaldean, but we do not know 126 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA which was his native state. He is the first of the last dynasty of Babylon, which raised her again to the leading power of Western Asia and ex- tended her dominion once more as far as the Mediterranean. In the uninterrupted struggle between Assyria and the Chaldeans over Babylon the latter were eventually victors, after their efforts were repeatedly thwarted for a couple of centuries. Babylonia was now Chaldean. The Chaldean migration had reached its goal and therewith also its end. CHAPTER XIV HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK A. THE SOURCES OuE knowledge of the ancient Orient is of recent date. The decipherment of the monuments which have supplied us with our information is the. result of the last half century. Even from this brief period a large portion must be deducted when actual work is considered, so inadequate are the means with which science is compelled to labor. Even today it cannot be said that any- thing approaching a systematic exploration of these old culture lands has yet been undertaken. The monuments which thus far have been recov- ered and which have furnished us with the most reliable sources extant for the history of the times, constitute but an infinitely small part of that which we might recover and is lying in reserve for future excavators. Every attempt, therefore, to construct for ourselves a connected history of the development of ancient Oriental peoples is doomed to partial failure beforehand. We know the essential conditions of certain periods that are illuminated by abundant sources which accident has put into our hands, or, at least, 127 128 BABYLONIA AND ASSYKIA we can note the effect of certain forces that oper- ate to produce results. But of other periods we have only a few details from which far-reaching conclusions must be drawn to derive from them the most general knowledge of events. Of many others — and they are many — we know nothing — the most we can do is to insert the names of two or three kings of whose deeds nothing has come down to us. It is further natural that the sources accessible to us should relate rather to the political events than to the active thought and dominant forces controlling the inner life of the people. The numerous inscriptions of the Assyrian kings were the first to be discovered, and that part of the history which is based upon them is as yet the most complete. But these records relate almost entirely to wars and territorial conquests, to bat- tles waged and booty won; that which we would more gladly learn of the people's life is to be gathered from scanty suggestions.^ The consideration of the cultural achievements and attainments of the ancient Orient remains, therefore, in default of sufficient sources, unsatis- factory. For some periods as, for example, the time of the first dynasty of Babylon and, in Assyria, the time from Tiglathpileser III. on- 'See, however, Social Life and Customs of Babylonians and Assyrians, by Professor A. H. Sayce.— Craig. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 129 ward, again, in Babylon, from Nebuchadrezzar to the Persian Conquest, and even for the age of the Seleucids, we have thousands of documents in our possession. They consist of contracts, judi- cial decisions, business documents of all kinds, and private letters and despatches. These sup- ply a varied abundance of detailed facts touch- ing the private life of the respective periods. But they have not yet been sufficiently studied to enable us to draw from the confusing mass of details the general characteristics of the cul- tural development — to sketch in clear and full lines the typical life of the times. The founda- tion for a thorough insight into the private life has as yet been laid only for the New-Babylonian period. Until this mass of material is mastered, and the numerous documents of the other periods have revealed their contents, there will be a demand for much studious toil and talent. And until the breaks between these periods, separated from each other by centuries and milleniums, are filled up by means of new inscriptions genera- tions will have passed, and this notwithstanding the incomparably rapid strides which Assyriology has made. The civilization of three milleniums, forgotten for two thousand years, cannot be called forth again from the silence of buried cities, from a language unknown, and a script so complex in three or four decades. 130 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA But even if these numerous documents, for whose mastery the strength of the few workers in this field is inadequate, were forced to yield up their secrets they would still reveal, for the most part, only one side of the life of the Baby- lonians and Assyrians, viz., that connected with business, and especially private business life. But so far as the popular and civic life of the people as a whole is concerned — in other words the social-economic conditions — less light is shed. Of much that remains of great importance to us in modem life we shall have to content ourselves for long with little or no knowledge. Business activities, and industrial life in the large, the conditions attaching to property ownership in lands and their effect upon the welfare of the state, governmental restraints, etc., are matters concerning which we receive little information from the royal inscriptions, and in a contract drawn up between A and B we naturally look in vain for such enlightenment. As we have already seen we know as yet noth- ing concerning the beginnings of that civilization which was native to Babylonia. The Sumerians belong to the prehistoric age, as much so as the Babylonians and Assyrians did when history was supposed to begin with Greece. The long ages in which man was resident in the valley of the Euphrates and developed there a civilization, HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 131 which, at the time of our earliest records, had stirred the conquering spirit of the foreigner, are still lost in the mists of antiquity. The time is yet distant when we shall be able to say from con- temporary documents, or works of art, how the first inhabitants of the Euphrates valley, strug- gling against barbarous conditions and adapting themselves to the requirements of the country, raised themselves to the higher stages of civiliza- tion. When and how the more important achieve- ments were made, how, for example, the greatest of intellectual feats, the development of writing, was accomplished, no sources have yet been dis- covered to tell us. The remotest antiquity of Babylonia, of which we have knowledge, had a fully developed system of writing as that of Egypt had in the valley of the Nile. B. THE LAND IN ITS ORIGINAl, STATE The low land of the Euphrates now, for the most part barren and marshy, was once the most fruit- ful portion of the earth. The productiveness of the soil is described as remarkable in the records of every age. The land, through the rich alluvial ; deposits of the Euphrates, like the Nile, gave to the agriculturalist the richest return for the least labor. In the climate of the Orient, where rain falls seldom, the lands through which these rivers coursed were the only ones which in the initial 132 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA stages of cultivation promised an adequate return to the tiller of the soil. On the other hand, in times of drouth, necessity compelled the Bedouin herdsmen to abandon the parched steppes with their flocks and herds and betake themselves to these fertile regions. Here bountiful nature pro- vided them, at little cost of labor, with fodder sufficient to tide them over the dry season. The transition from nomadic to agricultural life thus finds its explanation in the nature of the soil. The step. from an agricultural state to life in fortified cities is not very great and is quickly taken in a land exposed on all sides to attack from nomad tribes. But even this stage of transitional activity in the Euphrates valley was completed long before the time where our sources begin. The ancient centres of civilization : Eridu, LagasJi, Ur, Uruk, Larsa, have already an immemorial past when first they appear in history. Ages before they had reached the development which they maintained through all the varying changes of politics for three thousand years ; they were the seats of old sanctuaries that had commanded reverence for unknown generations, the homes of city-bred populations that lived by business and industry. Even at that time we must assume the existence of the regulations governing landed property and the various forms of professional activity bor- HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 133 rowed from the Sumerians, just as they continued to reassert themselves through the long period of Babylonian culture. In contrast to Occidental civilizations, whose growth we can follow from their beginnings, we meet here with a perfected organization of society such as would correspond to that which European peoples arrived at in the Middle Ages. Through all the storm and stress of the following three thousand years it continued. Each new tide of immigrants that poured over the land quickly felt the power of the old culture and submitted to it. Certainly, even the less for- tunate of the conquerors would get their share of the spoils, but an apportionment of the land among the peasantry has never been the custom. We cannot watch the progress of the people from the beginning. The leaders in the different con- quests always took the place of the former kings. If they did not wish to destroy all the civilization they found they had to accept it with its temples and cities, its disposition of landed property, and its social classes. That is one reason why the different peoples were so quickly assimilated. They did not develop gradually, but leaped at one bound to a higher stage, beyond which they could not go. We find consequently that a land system pre- vailed from the earliest times which we know onward which may best be described as clerico- 134 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA feudal. The deity was the landlord. He bestowed the land upon the priesthood and the king; hence there was temple property and state property. The king had control over the country lands, which he let out to his vassals. His authority did not extend over the territory which stood in the domain of the god: this belonged to the city in which the god dwelled, and there, naturally to the patricians and the temple. The land was tilled by dependent tenants who were required to deliver their share of produce to the owners — the temple, king, nobles, citizens. This organiza- tion which was ever adopted anew (with fresh arrivals) was never favorable under the circum- stances to the development of a peasant class. If, in the case of a new immigration, a strip of added territory was divided among the conquerors this could not be long maintained against the greater power of the crown possessions, which reached out and appropriated it as vassal land. This did not necessarily result in bondage. These tenants were in most cases free — as free as a man can be who retains just so much of his products, won from the soil with the sweat of his brow, as may permit him to enjoy life in an Oriental fashion. Bondage rarely resulted from force or legal oppression. The necessary complement of slaves was furnished from prisoners of war. These, however, were employed more likely in the HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 135 industries of the cities than in the cultivation of the lands. The frequently occurring cases of manumission met with in business life come from this class. The disposition of the land was, therefore, rather into small tracts, which were cultivated by the tenants for the owners. With the simple means afforded by this petty farming, and all the strenuous industry and use of every foot of earth which this system enforced, it was more akin to gardening than to agriculture. C. IRBIGATION The most important requirement of a fruitful cultivation of the ground in the Orient, with its rainless summers, is a regular supply of water. Just as the lack of it led the Bedouins from the steppes to the river valley, so it is the task of the agriculturalist to irrigate as much of the land's surface as possible. On the other hand, the great rivers, Euphrates and Tigris, when the snows begin to melt in the mountains, flow down with such volumes of water that they submerge the most productive parts of the' country. The river-beds become choked with the earthy deposits and the adjoining lands are turned into swamps, as is now the case with large tracts that once yielded bountiful harvests. Want of rain and 136 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA spring floods combined to compel the inhabitants to cope with these unfavorable conditions. They were forced to collect the overflow for the rainless season. Self-preservation demanded the regula- tion of the water supply. Thus it happened that the land from the earliest historical beginnings onward was intersected by a network of canals. This was a prime necessity in its development. By this means the overflow- ing waters at high flood were led off from the parts liable to inundation into the artificial chan- nels, whence in time of drouth it returned to irri- gate them. Some of these canals are constructed higher than the surrounding land so that the water can be let out upon it by means of sluices. Some of them are lower, and from these, as in Egypt, the water is raised by means of water-wheels, or, where less is required, by buckets. (The Shadduf of modern Egj'pt.) Though the construction of these smaller means was the work of the individual who held the land, the building of the great canals was a national enterprise designed to regulate the water supply of the entire land. Thus we find among the meagre accounts which we have of royal measures for the national good accounts of the construction of canals. It is clear that they were fully aware of the economic value of these interior improve- ments. In the older times, when they dated not HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 137 by the regular years but by important events, we find this entry : " In the year when such and such a war occurred" and following it: "When the king built such and such a canal." "After the conquest of Southern Babylonia," Kliammurabi says, "when Anu and Bel intrusted me with the rule of Sumer and Akkad and placed the reins of government in my hands I dug the canal Nar- Khammurabi, the Blessing of Men, the bringer of abundance of water to the land of Sumer and Akkad. The land upon both sides thereof I restored to tillage; storehouses for the grain I built; water for ages to come I procured for the land of Sumer and Akkad." In similar speech Nabopolassar and Nebuchadrezzar tell of the waterways they built. These canals were also used for purposes of national defence as in Hol- land. We learn that Nebuchadrezzar in the last days of Babylonia built the "Median Wall," and Nabima'id with its help converted his entire Baby- lonian empire into an island. Two famous canals traversed the whole of Babylonia; the one called Palakuttu (Palakottas),^ the other Ndr-sharri, or Aramaic Nahr-Malkd, i.e., "the kings' canal," a name which is met with in Hellenistic times. The first runs almost parallel to the Euphrates on its ' Also Pallakopas, identified by Friedrich Delitzsch, Wo Lag das Paradies?, with an Assyrian word pisanu-canal which occurs in the vocabularies, and this again with the bibhcal Ptshdn. — Craig. 138 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA southern side; the other joins the Tigris^ and Euphrates. Great canals and smaller ones stretched in all directions through the land as well as rude irri- gating ditches. Upon the maintenance of them depended the habitableness of the whole valley. Consequently the care of these internal waterways and works of irrigation occupied a prime place in the policy of the kings down to the destruction of the country by the Mongols. With the ruin of the canals a large part of the land was filled with pestilential swamps. The first task to be performed whenever the attempt is made to restore these waste regions to their former unpar- alleled prolific state^ is the reopening and build- ing of the canals, many of whose beds are still traceable. Wliile these numerous constructions were de- manded by the nature of the Babylonian plain they were neither necessary nor possible in the higher lying regions, especially in the highlands of Assyria, where the climate is more temperate. But, on the other hand, we meet here with 1 To the east of Babylon at Kut-el-AmAra. It is represented by the modem Shatt-el-HAi. — Craig. 2 Ashurbanipal in his annals records that during his reign the grain grew five cubits in height and that the heads thereof were five-sixths of a cubit. Apparently the grain (sheam) referred to is wheat and barley. The fact that such proportions are claimed would indicate that the actual growth was enormous. Some license must be allowed in the ancient " prosperity "-speeches of the king as well as in those of the modern politician. — Craig. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 139 instances in which the water supply of the city was brought from a distance. By means of canals Sennacherib conducted the waters from the moun- tainous regions of Bavian to the city of Nineveh, and Esarhaddon constructed a tunnel at Negub through which he brought the waters of the Zab to the city of Kalkhi as Ashurnatsirpal had done by other works. A relief from the palace of Ashurbanipal, now in the British Museum, repre- sents a great Babylonian park which is supplied with water through an arched conduit which corre- sponds exactly to those of classical antiquity.^ D. THE AETS In architecture invention and style depend largely upon the material at the disposal of the builder. In Babylonia there was neither stone nor suitable wood. Date palms, fig, and olive ' Sennacherib gives an interesting account of his work in this connection in his rock inscription at Bavian. Unfortunately the text is slightly damaged and contains some words whose meanings are not quite clear. He tells us, however, that he connected eigh- teen cities, which he names, by canals with the river Khosr, and that from the region of the city of Kisiri he dug another canal to Nineveh and made "these waters" to flow into it. To this he gave the name "Sennacherib's Canal." The importance he attached to this work is evident from his mention of it in two other inscriptions. At the same time he "enlarged the reservoir" (?) of Nineveh which had fallen in so that the inhabitants, liable to a water famine, "turned their eyes to the rains of heaven" on which they were dependent. The construction of canals goes back to the earliest times, ante 4000 B.C., according to those who hold to the date given by Nabonidus for Narim-sin, 3750 b.c. Urukagina constructed and dedicated one to his goddess Nina. — Craig. 140 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA trees, were practically alone in their arboreta. Whereas in Egypt stone in abundance for their large buildings was found on the Upper Nile, and was easily transported down the river, the Baby- lonians were compelled to bring even those which they used for their statues from afar, and for the most part overland. Thus we find Gudea bringing the diorite for his sculptures from Magan (Arabia). The colossal statues of Egypt were, therefore, utterly unknown in Babylonia, and their buildings were constructed of the only material at hand, viz., clay. Babylonia was the land par excellence of brick buildings, and the influence of Babylon upon the Orient nowhere appears more clearly than in the imitation of her architecture by Elamites, Assyrians, and Syrians in their art and use of brick, though they had stone in abundance. In default of wood and stone for pillars necessity led to the invention of pillars built of brick, but, so far as our present knowl- edge reaches, these were not in general use. Cedars from Mount Amanus, and from Lebanon, after the former was denuded of its supply, were found to be ready substitutes for the pillars and neces- sary beams. But these were only occasionally employed in construction. Assyria copied Baby- lonia even in this. The brick most largely used was sun-dried ; but for more substantial buildings kiln-dried were HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 141 employed, and these when used for veneering the walls were enamelled with vari-colored scenes and representations. Instead of mortar they used asphaltum with which the country abounds.^ One of the most characteristic products of Babylonian construction in brick is their stepped.- pyramids (zikurrat) which were carried upward, story upon story, to the number of seven at times, the wall of each successive one receding several feet from the one below. These constituted the glory of the great temples, and the topmost story was no doubt regarded as the dwelling-place of the deity. The story of the Tower of Babel is connected with the tower (or zikurrat) of E-saggil, the tem- ple of Bel-Merodach in Babylon. E-saggil means "the temple with the lofty tower." Owing to the statements of classical writers the invention of the arch has hitherto been attributed to the Etruscans, but the Babylonians made use of it in their most ancient buildings in Lagash, or Tel- loh.2 Their technical skill rested on scientific principles no less unattainable in modern archi- tecture than the Grecian idea of beauty in the ' Cf. .Genesis, Cap. 11. " They (the builders of the tower of Babel) had brick for stone and bitumen (asphaltum) for mortar."— Cmw?. ^ Recent discoveries have proved that the principle of the arch was known and applied in Babylonia almost 3000 years prior to the construction of the Cloaca maxima in Rome, dr. 1000 B.C., the oldest trace of it on classic soil. — Craig. 142 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA plastic art. The buildings which they constructed with brick must have been built according to rules and laws unknown to modern architecture, which views many of these ancient works with the same astonishment as is evoked by the Pyra- mids of Egypt. The temples are by far the most excellent ex- amples of Babylonian architecture. To a greater degree than the churches and convents of the Middle Ages they united in themselves all that Babylonian culture had developed in spiritual and material ability. We have already seen that they were in possession of a large part of the land and we must look upon them as the centres of intellec- tual life. The influence of the priesthood was not confined to religion ; the cultivation of science, and even the technical arts, no doubt, shared their attention. Such an organization with its temple forms a city with governing powers of its own, and the means is in our hands for obtaining full infor- mation respecting their administration of affairs. Countless clay tablets furnish data of importance, but, unfortunately, they have not yet received much attention from Assyriologists. E. EELIGION AND SCIENCE The nature of our sources makes it difficult for us to acquire a knowledge of the spiritual side of life. It was natural that education and instruc- HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 143 tion in religious matters should be assumed by the priests. They alone, in early times, understood the secret of writing and consequently were the protectors and patrons of all literature, sacred or profane, and the so-called practical sciences. Of the latter we have little documentary knowl- edge — only a few mathematical tablets being found in our collections.^ Their astronomical ob- servations on an extended scale are attested by hundreds of tablets. Babylonia is the mother- land of astronomy, and of astrology, which in the Orient is inseparable from it. As late as Hellen- istic-Roman times the ' ' Chaldeans ' ' were still the reputed masters of the science. The observation and record of the movements of the heavenly bodies were accurate. Omens were put forth and all manner of conjunctions were prophecies written upon the scroll of heaven. An eclipse of the sun is recorded even in the Assyrian-Eponym Canon as an event as noteworthy as a war. When Thales, the Ionic philosopher, astounded the Ionic-Greek world by foretelling a solar eclipse he borrowed his wisdom from the Babylonians, as Pythagoras 'The science of medicine had already begun to protest against the spell of the exorcist and rituals, and though the priestly M.D. was graesome enough at times in the potions he administered to his patient, many of his concoctions were mild compared to the brews prepared for the " Ricket" -suffering New Englander two hundred years ago. Hippocrates and Galen were indebted to Babylon. The same ideogram was used for doctor and magician and the god Ea was accredited with the healing urt.— Craig. 144 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA drew Ms philosophy, with its symbolism of num- bers from the same Semitic source.^ A vast num- ber of these observations of the heavenly bodies have come down to us, and numerous are the omens of the commonest arts of the prognosti- cator which we would gladly exchange for other material. Just as the Babylonians have lately proved their title to honor over the Etruscans for the invention of the arch found in classical Italy, so, too, the knowledge of the Etruscans, the mas- ters and teachers of Rome, was of old Babylonian origin. Etruscan hepatoscopy and divination has lately been traced to the same source through a most interesting tablet in the British Museum which represents the liver of an animal divided by lines into a number of sections for this pur- pose. The Babylonian omens are the precursors of the old Sibylline Books (not the pseudepi- graphic writings that have come down to us). The observation of the movements of the heavenly bodies was naturally accompanied by the determination of the times and seasons. Greece and Rome, significant as the fact is, borrowed their calendar from the Babylonians. Their year, ' Even the principle of organization in the Pythagorean Society is borrowed from the Orient. The religious gild, or sect, appears in opposition to tribal organization. The religious bond takes the place of racial relationship. Somewhat similar in its essence was Judaism before it became ossified, and also primitive Christianity and Mohammedanism. In Africa today societies exist which are founded on this principle. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 145 montli, and week we have still. The naming of days of the week after the gods of the sun and moon and the other five planets known to them has descended to ns from them. We still divide the day into 12 double hours, as the faces of our watches prove. In connection and harmony with these divisions stands their numeral system. This was the sexa- gesimal system, with the subdivisions 5 and 12, apparently founded upon astronomical observa- tions and calculations. In conjunction with this, however, the decimal system was also used. Our sources do not reach back to the time when either of these two systems was introduced nor to a period when one of them was used exclusively. The systems of weights and measures rests upon the same method of computation. Ancient Baby- lonia had, therefore, a system of reckoning that has only lately in modern times been carried out in our decimal system, after the unity of that original method of computation had, during thou- sands of years of development, been lost to science. We can see now that some recollection of its source continued down to our own days, as in the case of our chronological divisions; and we can also watch its efPects upon the peoples of the Occi- dent and elsewhere, in the new expressions of it which continually appear, without, however, being able to decide by what intermediaries it passed 146 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA over from the Orient. All sucli questions belong to fields of investigation scarcely touched upon, in which interesting discoveries relating to the pre- historic connections of our modem civilizations await the future. We are confronted with serious difficulties when we attempt to sketch the service of the temple and priesthood, worship and religion. It would require an extensive treatise to set forth the mani- fold changes of ideas which took place in connec- tion with the cultus in the course of three thousand years. Our sources here are much more frag- mentary than in the field of political history, and we have scarcely begun to grasp the ideas in their origin and growth. So long as the primitive times of Babylonia and the beginning of its civilization are veiled from view it will scarcely be possible to reach a certainty of knowledge sufficient to throw a clear light upon the essential nature and origin of the multiplex pantheon revealed by the inscriptions. The fundamental character, how- ever, of the Babylonian religion is discernible at a glance. It is an astral religion ; the moon, sun, and stars are the central objects around which it turns. But it would be a gross misunderstanding to suppose tliat Babylonian theology identified the gods with the heavenly bodies. To do so would be as incorrect as to describe the Christian religion as a worship of heaven (or the heavens) . The stellar HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 147 world was, on the contrary, according to Baby- lonian theology only the supremest revelation of divine power, that revelation in which the govern- ance and purposes of the gods could be most plainly observed. Moreover, all that is, the visible and invisible, is but an expression or part of the divine being. There are, it is true, countless gods, but these are only the forms through which the one divine Power is revealed. Such are the moon, the sun, the earth, the water, etc., from the great- est of objects to the smallest. In these the deity reveals himself ; they are the forms of the divine becoming in matter, but behind them lies the one great Power.^ ' We must guard against misunderstanding. We have to do here not with a religion, or doctrine of Being intended for all, but merely with the fundamental concepts of a cosmic philosophy ["Weltanschaung") whose profounder truths were revealed only to the initiated. In the cultus, or in the form, so to speak, in which religion finds its confirmation, it does not appear. The people knew of it only as the doctrine of the learned. [And since in prim- itive times no esoteric doctrine such as this could have existed, prolonged reflection and observation being the necessary conditions of its attainment, we must furi^her guard against the conclusion that the statements made above, viz., that Babylonian theology did not identify the gods with the astral bodies, and that the count- less gods were regarded only as the forms through which the one divine power was revealed, lend confirmation to the erroneous notion of a primitive monotheism as so often held by theologians and philosophers, e.g., Kreuzer, Symbolik; or for ex., in the case of the Israelites, Baethgen, Beitraege zur Sem. Religionsgeschichte, who endeavors to prove in the last part of his book that the primitive faith of Israel was monotheistic. Complete failure must attend every attempt to maintaia a theory so opposed to the history of the race as a whole and so irreconcilable with the ascertainable processes of human development. Ancient literatures, whether 148 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA The heavenly bodies are, consequently, only the most important forms through which the divine power is revealed. Whether this concep- tion of things comes so near to the truth when judged by modern thought is, perhaps, worthy of reflection. The conception itself is unmistakably uttered in an explanatory astronomical tablet. This says of the planet Jupiter, the planet of Marduk, the head of the Babylonian pantheon: "Wlien Jupiter stands some degrees above the horizon he is the god of the planet Mercury ; when he stands higher he is the god of the planet Jupi- ter ; when he reaches his culmination he is the god of Mars." Jupiter always remains the same planet independently of its position, but a differ- ent divine power reveals itself in it, is active in it, according to the position reached : another aspect of the divine activity appears with each succeed- ing change, just as others appear in the water, in the earth, in the individual stone, tree, metal, fire, man, etc. Therefore, among the Babylonians the science of the stars, astronomy, was the science of sciences. It pointed out to them the divine will and taught them how this will revealed itself Semitic or Indo-Germanic, point, in my judgment, to quite the opposite — the heavenly bodies were regarded in the -primitive ages as supernatural beings, and that very naturally. Polytheism and animism must have existed side by side. This Babylonian esoteric theology did not spring up at once like Athena from the head of Zeus.] — Craig. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 149 everywhere in nature. The starry heavens is the open book in which the destiny of heaven and earth, and of all that is upon it, is recorded and in which it may be read. It is, consequently, no accident which made the Babylonians the world's teachers in astronomy. This conception of the universe was astronomy, and out of it alone could an astronomy be developed, just as our conception of the universe also grew out of astronomy. In the stars, the Babylonian beheld the whole divine will and, therefore, all earthly things must be images of the heavenly. For that which exists above as archetype must find its counter type here below. The organized state must conform exactly to the heavenly prototype. Times and seasons were determined by the greater heavenly bodies, as they were also by later Judaism in the post-exilic priestly code.^ The conceptions of the Babylonians and the impor- tance of their astronomy can, therefore, be most clearly perceived in the science of their calendar. For the calendar, based on the observation of the planetary movements, is the first requisite and, for practical daily life, the most important requi- site for a conception of the world which concludes what its destiny is by observation of the courses of the stars. This calendrical-science stands in 1 Cf. e.g. Gen. 1, 14. 150 BABYLONIA AND ASSYBIA the closest organic connection with the doctrine as to all that is; it reflects the entire system of the universe and forms its hasis.^ A complete pantheon by itself appears in the inscriptions of the early rulers of Lagash (Tel- loh). It is possible that this still points back to the Sumerian influence of an early epoch which, nevertheless, was Semitic. This is suggested by the names and cults of certain gods. The period stands historically even almost by itself. It is nevertheless clear that peculiarities of the ' ' Canaanite ' ' inhabitants are discernible in it, and, on the other hand, that the broad general views as to God and the universe are specifically Baby- lonian. Here, as elsewhere, we are forced to recognize the fact that we are far from the begin- ning of civilization. But that which we meet with in the inscriptions of the Southern Babylonian dynasties helps us who have to study history back- ward. There the deities we meet with are the same deities that from then on constantly reap- pear. The simple explanation of that is found in the fact that these Southern Babylonian cities maintained their importance throughout the whole period of Babylonian civilization, whereas Lagash comes before us as the relic of a city of bygone times that was prematurely destroyed. But we are still too imperfectly informed to account for ' Cf. on the reform of Nabunatsir, p. 63. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 151 the peculiar phenomena which we meet with here for the first time. That which we do meet with is Semitic or Semi- tized, but how does it stand related to the past? The question cannot be answered until it is known how the old culture-cities — Eridu, TJr, Larsa, Isin, TJruk — stood in relation to the older culture. The names of the deities show at once what was the dominant cult: In Ur the moon-god, in Larsa the worship of the sun, in Uruk Nana or Ishtar, the female principle, in Nippur was the temple of Bel, the "Lord of Lands," i.e., the earth. But each one of these, and many another unknown centre, had developed in its temple during the centuries and milleniums a theology of its own. Mixed up with this, and matured by the effort to reconcile it with the teaching of other centres, was an inde- pendent view, as to the causa rerum, that grew up around the god. In addition the different immi- grations left behind them a "deposit of faith." The newly introduced ideas and the old native views had always to be adjusted and adapted to one another. It is true that the cultus, so far as we can follow it historically, had already acquired considerable fixity. The Semitic immigrations of the three milleniums known to us introduced noth- ing very essential. Still, some important ideas appear even now for the first time as, for exam- ple, the change of the worship of the god of the 152 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA atmosphere, Adad or Eamman, by the "Canaan- ites. " But, the less we are able to follow the development of ideas, the more necessary it is to seek for their origin in a time that as yet is wrapped in obscurity. At best it would be a herculean task to disentangle the various threads that cross one another in the different traditions of the temples and follow them back to their begin- nings. It is very doubtful if this can ever be done. At present, however, we are immeasurably far from the beginning, for we know nothing of the real object of the investigation, viz., the tem- ple traditions, with the exception of the little that we know of the Marduk-cult in Babylon. The farther North we go the purer appears the Semitic in the period known to us ; Sumerian is no longer written here in the oldest discovered inscriptions of the time of Naram-Sin. The dupli- cation of the cultus shows that the country stood divided into North and South. There was a South Babylonian sun-god in Larsa, and a North Baby- lonian one in Sippar. The Ishtar of Uruk in the South had a rival in the Northern city of Agade. We know less of the North in the early times than of the South. Later, after the first Baby- lonian dynasty, other cities appear ; Cutha with its cult of Nergal, the god of the under world. Moon worship, which had its chief seat in Ur, had not the same importance in the North; but in HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 153 Harran of Mesopotamia stood the most famous sanctuary of the moon-god. Babylon has not yet come to light in the in- scriptions of the oldest period. It is possible and probable that it owes its importance to political conditions of a comparatively late age. It may have been first founded by Sargon of Agade, if a much mutilated passage in the omens relating to his reign may be made to bear this interpretation. It became the most influential city of Babylonia, as we have seen, during the first dynasty. When it became the capital of the Babylonian empire, and thereby gained at the same time authority in economic life, there was developed in accord- ance with the Oriental way of thinking a theo- logico-historico justification of Babylon's great- ness.^ Just as Athens sought, when it reached the hegemony, through mythology and history to establish its antiquity, so the learned priests and scribes of Babylon tried to conjure forth witnesses and proofs to show that she was the seat of the oldest culture and the centre of the world, and they did it with greater success. Marduk, the biblical Merodach, and former god of the city, becomes at once, by the priestly manipulation, the chief god in the work of creating the world. We have fragments of the creation- 'The Orient, everywhere, Babylon, Assyria, Israel, etc., knew the religious value of a " Tendenz-Schrijt." — Craig. 154 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA myth of Babylon which ascribe the leading role to Marduk. In Southern Babylonian temples there doubtless existed similar works of early origin which reflected the conditions of the most flourishing period of their respective cities. The creation-epic anticipates the predominance of Babylon which was first established by the dynasty of Sumuabi and Khammurabi. It is Mar- duk who is made to enter the lists in a world- struggle for the rule of the dii superi which is threatened by the chaotic Tihamat, and who, after cutting in two the monster, conceived of as a great serpent or dragon, creates the world and its firmament out of the two halves. In Nippur the hero was doubtless Bel, the god of that city. In the sanctuaries of the other cities the leading role of Shamash (sun), Sin (moon), Ishtar would be illuminated. The later the myth the greater the necessity for giving due consideration to those that preceded. Whether we shall ever become acquainted with the time in which the growth of these separate myths will appear clear to view we cannot say. At present we know chiefly some fragments of the latest which enable us to make out the connection. Of some of the others we have only insignificant remnants. Although we must assume that a copious literature of such epics and myths grew up during the thousands of years, we know, at present, not much beyond the HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 155 fact that they received their final redaction in Babylon during the first dynasty. The Gilgamish epic, it is true, is for the most part known to us from the copies made for the library of Ashur- banipal. Some fragments of it, however, from copies made in the time of the First Dynasty, have lately been found. The deluge narrative had at that time been cast into the form in which it has come down to us; but this was by no means an ancient period iu the life of Babylonia. The creation-myths of Babylonia are the pat- terns after which the biblical are composed; just as Babylonia was the teacher of Western Asia in all intellectual matters. We have almost no other witnesses of this than the comparatively few fragments of Assyro-Babylonian literature which thus far have been recovered from the ruins (and for the most part from the library of Ashurbani- pal) and the remnants of Jewish literature which have been saved for us through canonization in the Bible. The relation of each to the other is that ex- isting between the focusing point of all culture and an insignificant, inferior state — that between origination and imitation. But so long as we have nothing more we must attempt to form from what we have our view of the religious life of the Orient. Religion undoubtedly played a role in the life of this people which the modern man may only too easily underestimate. The priests were the 156 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA fosterers of science. Consquently every doctrine, every attempt to penetrate into the essential nature of things, every confirmation and justifica- tion of that which is, and every attempt to intro- duce something new, had to be tested by reference to the hoary doctrine of "Beginnings," and, by that, justified or disapproved. The mental atti- tude of the Middle Ages which tested the right- ness and righteousness of everything by the teachings of the Bible, as the reformers and their opponents appealed to the Bible in support of their religious and political demands, was exactly that of the ancient Orient. And more than this, these teachings whose power is still often more potent over the life of modern peoples than is clear to those not historically educated — these old Babylonian doctrines, carried forward in various forms by Jews and other peoples into the varied conditions of civilized life, remain in essence what they were — the expression of the Babylonian hier- archy as the representative of all intellectual life in the most ancient civilisation. We may, per- haps, think we are justified in maintaining that the prayers and ideas of Judaism reveal a differ- ent world of thought from that presented by the polytheism of the rest of the Orient. But, the view, or pious belief in the development of Juda- ism, and in its later manifestations, takes on quite a different aspect in the light of universal history. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 157 Proof of this in matters of detail cannot be adduced from the fragmentary literature; but it is evident to the simplest reflection on the nature and origin of human thoughts that the ideas which conquered the old civilized world did not spring up in some remote corner. In brief, where the exciting cause is present an idea may arise, and the same mental struggles which Israel and Judah had to pass through for the first time under the kings, or in the exile, Babylonia passed through frequently long before in the course of her pros- perous periods. The fruits of such struggles had long since been acquired in the intellectual life of the Babylonians. It was thence that the "Prophet" of Israel got his spiritual weapons, his education, and his knowledge, and there Juda- ism must have received not only its impulse, but also its entire system. In the life of a civilized people, such as the Babylonian, numerous occasions arise where dis- content with existing conditions bring together large assemblies who frame their demands into a system, and, after the manner of the Orient, jus- tify it. As all Oriental history teaches, life for many must also have assumed at such time the form of a sect, which grew out of social conditions, and which sought to establish its teachings espe- cially on religious grounds. Many such sects must have arisen and have been favored by the force of 158 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA circumstances; and from the ideas tliey promul- gated Judaism must have drawn for its own. That the hidden courses of human thought and history which led to the development of these ideas shall be again made clear to view cannot be expected. This much, however, we may confidently conclude from what we know, and from the laws of human development, that the origins of the fundamental teachings of Judaism not yet discovered in cunei- form literature shall yet be found there. The doc- trine of a coming Deliverer could arise only in the centre of culture where the prestige of power was no longer what it was in a greater past. The doc- trine is genetically related to that view of the universe which inferred from the circuits of the planets the reoccurrence of everything else in the world, whether great or small, and which read by the light of the stars the future development of all things on the earth, and in the universe.^ Next to the teachings of religion and closely connected therewith mental activity finds expres- sion in the development of mythology. In so far as this is a doctrine of gods and temples we have already seen how limited our knowledge is. We have to lament the same limitation with respect to the fragments of this literature which deals with mythological heroes and which always takes a prime place in the non-religious poetry. A great 1 Cf. below the remarks on Sargon of Assyria. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 159 number of fragments bear witness to the exist- ence of a whole series of epics, but of very few have we recovered enough to enable us to ascertain their contents, or conjecture them. The best known of all is the Gilgamisli^ Epic. The name of the hero is written Is-tu-bar, and so he was at first called; and, as he was supposed to be the biblical Nimrod, the name Nimrod-epic became general. Gilgamish is the Babylonian Heracles, whose deeds are glorified in the poem which fur- nished the Hellenic Alexander-romance with the legendary material it wove around the name of the Macedonian conqueror. The form in which the epic has come down to us it received in Uruk. According to tradition the old Ishtar-Nana city had been founded by Gilgamish, and the epic reflects the conditions into which it had fallen as the result of Elamite oppression. Gilgamish, like Heracles, is essentially a solar mythological figure. One of the episodes described in the epic is the story of the Deluge which forms the basis of the biblical account. The brief epic of Ishtar's descent into the under-world to restore from the world of spirits her dead brother and spouse, ; Tammus (Adonis), is preserved in its entirety. ^ Formerly following Geo. Smith, who discovered the epic, the name of the hero which is written ideographically was read phonet- ically Izduhar until Mr. Pinches discovered the true pronunciation a few years ago. See for Smith's first account Traas. Soc. Bib. Arch, ii., 213 ff., iii., 530 H.— Craig. 160 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Other epics, portions of which exist, are Etana and the Eagle, the legends of the Plague Demon, and of the Storm-god, Zu. But these are not yet perfectly understood.^ The Fables of Animals, so natural to the Ori- ental, were also complete in early times in Baby- lonia. We have fragments of the "Ox and Horse," the Fox, the Serpent-god, and others of wMch, however, we must be content to know even less than of the preceding until more has been discovered. Numerous unpublished fragments, too broken to be understood, as is the case with many similar compositions, create a hope that the future may reward us with a completer knowledge. F. COMMEECE, BUSINESS, INDUSTRY To present clearly the importance of Baby- lonian industry and trade would be one of the most worthy tasks and one accompanied by most satisfactory results. But we are by no means in a position to do this, though it is clear that during three thousand years the ups and downs of busi- ness were as great as the changes in political life. We can take it for granted that Babylonia's, and particularly Babylon's, importance and pre- ponderance rested upon her industry and business. In the entire period through which we can follow ' Translations of the epics and myths are given by Jensen in Schrader's KeilinschrifUiche Bibliothek, Bd. vi. — Craig. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 161 Assyria's power, Babylon was as a political unity, powerless. It was compelled to purchase its inde- pendence from Assyria or, on the other hand, to win with gold the support of Elam against her. It lacked the men necessary to wage a war on its own account, as it could not otherwise be under the con- ditions which controlled landed property. This fact alone is sufficient to show that it was predomi- nantly an industrial land. It was doubtless part of Sennacherib's intention in the destruction of Babylon to divert a part of its trade and industry to his own newly chosen capital, Nineveh. We have previously seen that Babylonian poli- tics from the time of the Kassite dynasty were bent on controlling the way through Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean, and that Kadashman- Kharbe then attempted to secure a road through the desert to Syria and the Phoenician harbors. In this effort there can be no doubt that he had Babylonian trade in mind. As to the conditions of trade in earlier times Gudea 's inscriptions furnish us data for some conclusions. Gudea transported both stone and wood for his buildings from Phoeni- cia, Syria, and Arabia. The Tel-Amarna letters also throw some light on Babylonian industry.^ Both Babylonians and the princes of Mitani de- manded gold from Egypt. The quid pro quo was industrial products, especially lapis lazuli, so ■ Cf. p. 78 ff. 162 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA highly prized by the Egyptians, or an imitation of it, one of the chief products of Babylonian exports. The Egyptians got weapons and battle chariots from Mitani and even from Assyria. When the Babylonians ordered inlaid work in ivory and ebony in Egypt they were dealing only in fashionable objects in Egyptian style such as have been found in Nineveh. These signified no more with them than Chinese porcelain or Japan- ese handiwork among ourselves. Little is known as yet of the shipping trade on the Persian Gulf, and, consequently, the other question related to this, viz., the commercial route to India, by which the eastern and western worlds communicated, cannot be answered. It is incon- ceivable that the oldest civilization of Babylonia which grew up in the South did not develop navigation on the "Sea of the Rising Sun." At tbe point at which our knowledge begins we fijid that it has already advanced inland toward the North. Naturally, in view of the contents, no men- tion of such matters is to be found in the oldest inscriptions, and there is little prospect that the near future will add to our knowledge. In later times the Chaldeans kept up navigation on the gulf. The country known as the "Sea-Land," which prospered for centuries, doubtless owed a part of its prosperity and its power to withstand Assyria to the wealth acquired through traffic with HISTORICAL RETROSPECT AND OUTLOOK 163 the East. Merodach-baladan possessed ships on which he fled across the "bitter- waters," or great Lagoon, to Elam. At that time there was no fleet in Babylonia. Sennacherib had to employ naval architects from Phcsnicia to build ships for him in Assyria, and these were thence taken South by river.^ Under these circumstances there could not have been any trade with the East. Dilmun, the island of Bahrein, including also the adjoining coast lands, which the early Babylonians regarded as a part of their territory, was in the time of Sar- gon II. a distant island from which he alone among the kings of the period collected tribute. None of his successors mention it. The traffic on the Per- sian Gulf was probably under the control of Elam. Few products of Babylonian industry have come down to us. Only a very few and com- paratively insignificant monumental remains of architure and sculpture, of which Assyria has furnished so many, have been recovered from the mounds of the mother-land. Those of Telloh have yielded the most and have supplied us with a goodly number of statues and sculptures of the kings and patesis of Lagash. Starting from the crude beginnings of the first kings, and rapidly progressing, the statues of Gudea and his age, the sculptures of Naram-Sin, show the highest ' Even the sailors who manned these ships were drawn from Tyre, Sidon, and Javan. — Craig. 164 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA attainment in technique. It appears as if we had here a sudden renaissance after a period of great decline. The careful and exquisite work on a monument of Merodach-baladan, in which he is represented in the act of clothing a vassal with the investiture of office, is one of the few known products of later art.^ A great number of similar monuments, dating from the Kassite period on- ward, cannot compare with this in point of execu- tion. Some few representations in clay from real life prove only that the future may yet reveal to us evidence of keen and humorous portrayal of private life. The same limitations extend to our knowledge of the rules and form of the state constitution, the administration, and army. The Babylonian inscriptions, in contrast to the Assyrian, never deal with the wars and other deeds of the rulers. That which we are able to present on these points is rather to be inferred from the better attested methods of Assyria, which, since they sprang up under like conditions, manifest, in the main fea- tures, similar forms of development. ' It is now in the Royal Museum of Berlin. An excellent repro- duction of it is to be found in Helmolt's Weltgeschichte, Bd. iii., S. 29. Notwithstanding its excellence the bane of Babylonian art, servile imitation, is nowhere better illustrated than on this monolith. The vassal, with the exception of cap and sandals, is simply a minor reproduction of the king. The robes they wear are identical and the lines in which they fall do not vary a hair's-breadth. A painful lack of freedom and spontaneity in conception is the result. — Craig. II— ASSYRIA ASSYRIA CHAPTEE I THE MESOPOTAMIAN PERIOD "We have already seen that the rise of Assyria took place in a time upon which the full light of history falls, or which can be illuminated with- out difficulty by the excavations. It has been further pointed out that its natural extension in the first place was toward Mesopotamia. This became a part of its undisputed territory, and the possession of it raised Assyria to a sovereign power as large and as important as Babylonia. Before we enter upon the history of Assyria it is, therefore, necessary to get a clear idea of the state of affairs in Mesopotamia. We have assumed, and results, so far as they can be traced historically, confirm it, that the great Semitic immigrations within Babylonia fol- lowed, in the main, the direction from north to south. Mesopotamia was consequently exposed to them at a still earlier time. The first Semites that we meet with in Southern Babylonia, as representatives of historical times, must at one 167 168 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA time have been dwellers of Mesopotamia. What preceded them is yet still more a prehistoric ques- tion than life in Babylonia, inasmuch as no exca- vations whatever have been conducted there. We have a large collection of omens which relate to conditions about 3000 b.c, the time of Sargon and Naram-Sin (although they also take account of later times and received their present form at a much later period). Their geographical boundary indicates clearly the extent of Baby- lonian influence and culture. This collection, be- side mentioning the king of South Babylonia, and the one of North Babylonia, knows also of another king who bore the title Shar Kishshati, that is, "king of the World." {Cf. p. 47, "king of the Four Quarters of the World.") His king- dom can have had its centre only in Mesopotamia, at least northward from Babylonia. However that may be, we are certain not only that Mesopo- tamia stood under the influence of Babylonian culture, but also that it formed an integral part of it, and that it had its share in shaping the development of the Euphratean lands. That this was so is attested by the fact of the importance and honor ascribed to the chief sanctuary there, that of Sin, the moon-god of Harran. It is no accident when one of the biblical narratives makes Ur and the other Harran the scene of Abraham's early life. Both of them were in the eyes of all THE MESOPOTAMIAN PERIOD 169 Oriental peoples the places par excellence of moon-worsliip, and Sin, on the other hand, was the most important god of Babylonia. We meet also with the worship of Ba'al-Harran, the god of Harran, in Sendjirli in Northern Syria. A relief from there consecrated to him is now in the Berlin Museum. In political history we can form a fair estimate of the role which this country played. A develop- ment similar to that which we have traced in the South must have taken place there. The kingdom which grew up must have fought the like wars with its rivals, as we find later to have been waged by Assyria, who fell heir to it. "Kings of the World" must have entered into rivalry with the kings of Babylon for the dominion of Babylonia, and, in turn, have fallen subject to them. As we have already seen, Mesopotamia was, in ancient times as now, the connecting link between Baby- lonia and the West. Our inscriptions furnish us with no information of these wars in the time prior to 1500 e.g., but the following period aids us sufficiently in forming a general picture of the times until the spade shall have won its honors in these fields also. Sir Austen H. Layard once began to dig in Arban, in the Khabur valley, and secured antiquities from a palace of one of the patesis (or priest-kings) by the name of Mushesh- Ninib. These monuments indubitably belong to 170 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA the pre- Assyrian Mesopotamian period. In addi- tion to tliese, antiquities have been found of a Hittite type, and of a crude age, similar to those found at Senjirli in Syria, at the ruin Tel-Halaf, near Ras-al-cain at the source of the Kliabur. Moreover, the site of Bit-Adini, the outpost of the Mesopotamian Aramaean kingdom, and known to Ashur-natsir-pal and Shalmaneser II., has been fixed. Some remains exposed at Harran probably belong to Assyrian times, as Shalmaneser II. and Ashurbanipal both wrought on the temple of the moon-god. We must assume that a kingdom that had its capital in Harran, or somewhere else northward from Babylonia, not only cast eager eyes toward the latter, but also, and at first, tried to acquire territory from less civilized peoples. As Mesopo- tamia was the intervening link in the connection between Babylonia and Syria and Palestine, so Mesopotamia, as an independent power was the natural conqueror of these lands, whether by peaceful methods or by force of arms. As an indication of the first side of this extension refer- ence has already been made to the notices of Abraham's cult at He]jron and that of the moon- god in Sendjirli.i We shall see later how in his- torical times the successors of these Mesopo- tamian kings possessed the regions on the right 'P. 169. THE MESOPOTAMIAN PERIOD 171 bank of the Euphrates and the district of Malatia as far as Cappadocia and very probably as far as Cilicia beyond the Taurns. Harran furtlier- more ruled the roads which in the North led into Armenia. From this point we find the Assyrians at an early period under Adad-nirari I. and Shal- maneser I. pushing up between the two rivers, while still expanding toward Babylonia, and this imme- diately after they had taken possession of Mesopo- tamia. Clay tablets written in Babylonian very similar to the Tel-Amarna tablets, have been found in Cappadocia. They reveal the influence of Assyrian colonization in these regions, and consequently belong to the first period of Assyr- ia's appearance there under Shalmaneser I., cir. 1300 B.C. The character of the language and writing show that they were not novelties in that region, but, on the contrary, that long practice in the art of writing antedated them. CHAPTEE II THE KINGS OF MITANI The first records which we have show us Mesopo- tamia under foreign rule. Our sources are the Tel-Amarna Letters of King Dushratta of Mitani to Amenophis III. and Amenophis IV. The pic- ture which they afford us of the intercourse between the two lands holds good also for the predecessors of the two Pharaohs, in so far as they advanced into Asia. Naharina is the name by which they generally speak of Mesopotamia. In this connection it is a matter of comparative indifference how much gold Dushratta begged for himself from Egypt, or how many letters he wrote to get the best of a bargain with his "brother" and son-in-law there. That which is of prime in- terest is to recognize that these Mitani princes are the represenatives of a barbarian immigration which took possession of Mesopotamia. The god Teshub, whom they worship, was also sacred to the Hittite people in the north of Asia Minor along the river Halys. This would seem to estab- lish a relationship between them and the latter. The only letter in the native language, one from Dushratta to Amenophis III., is, therefore, a 172 THE KINGS OF MITANI 173 monument of "Hittite," or an allied language. Names similar to the Hittite and the Mitanian of this period we meet with again later in the people of Kummukh and their kindred under Tiglathpileser I. They belong then to the same family group. The deporting of Marduk's statue to the land of Khani as reported by Agu- Kakrime/ might lend support to the hypothesis of an earlier stage of this Hittite conquest. The Kassite occupation of Babylonia is a case in point, as it parallels the appearance of these Hittites or Mitani in the northern regions. The residence of the Mitani kings is not dis- closed by their letters ; but the country known by them as Mitani must have lain approximately to the north of Harran, where at all events their national centre was. As we have already noted, it fell as an inheritance to the last old Mesopo- tamian kingdom and its extent can, therefore, be computed. In the direction of Babylonia it in- cluded Nineveh, which, accordingly, in the time of Dushratta, cir. 1430 b.c, had not become Assyr- ian as it must formerly have been Mesopotamian. As a matter of course the whole of Mesopotamia belonged to it, and Melitene (Khanigalbat) on the right bank of the Euphrates, and the adjoining part of Cappadocia as far as the Taurus, and possibly beyond as far as Cilicia. To this part of Cappadocia the Assyrians gave the name Mutsri, 174 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA the Egyptians Sanqara. (In one of the Tel- Amarna letters from Alashia it is called Shank- har.) To the west and north of this portion of the kingdom were the Kheta (Hittites), the oppo- nents of the Mitani but related by race to them. With them they waged wars and one of them is referred to in a letter of Dushratta to Amenophis III. The Kheta must either have pressed through the region of the Mitani when they got into Syria, or they only skirted the territory of Mitani and entered Cilicia through the Cilician gates. Upon their profuse asseverations of friendship with Egypt there rests the same suspicion as upon those of the Babylonians. The kings of Mitani are also declared by Egyptian vassals in Phoenicia to be the natural enemies of a faithful servant of Pharaoh. This kingdom must have existed a long time; for Dushratta, the writer of the letters, names his father, Sutarna, who sent his daughter, Gilukhipa, to the harem of Amenophis III. This is also attested by an Egyptian document. He also men- tions his grandfather, Artatama, who had dealings with Thothmes IV., the predecessor of Amen- ophis III., and had concluded the same sort of a bargain with him. It usually turns on the ques- tion of dowry. The writer of the letter was him- self at the court of Amenophis III. ; he may have grown up there as a sort of hostage when his THE KINGS OF MITANI 175 father died. In one of his letters to Pharaoh he infortos him of an insurrection which broke out to which his brother fell a victim, and how upon his return he quelled it. In the same letter he tells of the war with the Klieta, who wished to make use of the opportunity against him. In the midst of all the parley and pother about presents there is one letter which contains an important historical statement. Dushratta writes to Amenophis III. that he would like to have him return the statue of the goddess Ishtar of Nineveh, which shortly before had been sent down to Egypt, as she had been sent back with honor during the days of his father when she had been there. It is not quite clear what this journey of Ishtar meant. One can hardly explain it other- wise than that Dushratta, as his father also, had conquered Nineveh and did not dare to take the goddess, the sign of victory, home with them, but — presumably because of her anger, which decided her to go into a strange land — sent her to the Egyptian king whose over-lordship was thereby acknowledged. "With this the tribute spoken of in the Egyptian inscriptions would well agree. The question arises then: From whom did Dushratta take Nineveh? Hardly from Assyria, but rather from Babylonia; but the answer cannot be given decisively. For us the most important thing is the fact here attested that 176 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Dusliratta actually was lord of Nineveh, for this fact furnishes us with an assured starting-point from which to determine the advance of Assyria. Dushratta's date corresponds almost with the close of the brilliant period of his people. The next eighty or one hundred years saw Assyria mistress of Mesopotamia, and her kings take the title "king of the World" after they have driven out the Mitani, a title which they have to defend against Babylonia. The rule of the kings of Mitani who are known to us coincides with the end of the epoch intro- duced with the advance of this group of peoples beyond the Euphrates. It may have passed in its first strength as far as Babylonia,^ where at the time of the First Dynasty of Babylon, cir. 2000 B.C., it appears to have made itself felt. When during the Tel-Amarna period the Kassites of Babylonia and the Mitani of Mesopotamia appear as rivals, the most probable supposition would be that the Mitani or their predecessors were driven back. 'The origin of a clay-tablet containing a contract between "Hittite" or Mitani persons is not yet detennined. CHAPTEE III THE RISE OF THE LAND OF ASHUR As was the case with ' ' the kingdom of Babylon, ' ' the ' ' land of Ashur ' ' was originally limited. It com- prised the territory belonging to the city of Ashur, the modern Kalah Shergat. In later times this lay almost outside of the limits of Assyria proper, that is to say, without the boundary formed by a line rimning from Nineveh to the mountain range, the Tigris, and the Lower Zab. It is certain, from the position of Ashur in the South, and at the same time on the east bank of the Tigris, that it could not be the capital of the later land of Ashur. It inclined rather in the direction of the south, toward Babylonia, than toward the north and west, in which direction it first began to expand. When we assume, therefore, that Ashur was once a city like so many in the Euphrates valley we are inclined to the opinion that its patesis ruled under the protection of Babylonia, at times under that of Mesopotamia. The territory between the Upper and Lower Zab formed almost a prov- ince by itself. It had its own capital, Arhela (Arba'il), which, in the time of Assyrian great- 177 178 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ness, had an importance on the cultural side such as Ashur had in the more limited Assyria, or Har- ran in Mesopotamia. After the fall of Assyria this part of the country became again the real seat of administrative power, or paramount in the formation of states. Arbela must, therefore, also have played the part of a capital in pre- Assyrian times. The central point of the numer- ous forms of states which must have existed in pre-Assyrian centuries and millenniums was also at times to be found here, and excavations would probably bring to light documents which would reveal such a condition. On the east this region was bounded by the mountain territory of the Lulubi, one of whose kings, Anu-banini, left an inscription in the Zagros mountains. It belongs apparently to the period of Naram-Sin. In the plain was the capital of the province, whose king, Bukhia, son of Asiri, had his palace near Kerkuk, east of the Lower Zab, and called himself "king of the Land Khurshiti." The inscription is pre- Assyrian and is written in ancient style. It was the only one found, but, with a few more clay- tablets from the same region and possibly from the same place,^ and also pre-Assyrian, it suggests ' The name of the mound is Vyran^Shehir near Kerkuk. Many tablets were obtained from this place by Bagdad dealers in antiq- uities a few years ago, and 300 pieces of the collection are said to have been sold in London. See Meissner, O. L. Z., 1902, S. 245.— Craig. RISE OF THE LAND OF ASHUR 179 what results might be anticipated if excavations were made. Nineveh must have played in prehistoric times a similar role to that which we have assumed for Arbela. Nineveh and Assyria are almost identical names for us, but the city first rose to greatness under Sennacherib when it became the royal seat. But on the other hand, as the result of the rise of Assyria, it lost its original importance, a fact which is attested, as at Arbela, by the respect for its cult of Ishtar of Nineveh. In the period of the Tel-Amarna Letters it belonged as we saw to the Mitani. Naturally, as the former centre of wor- ship in the country, it always maintained its influence under Assyrian rule — just as Arbela did — and the Assyrian kings shared in the build- ing and restoring of its temples. But it was not until Sennacherib that it became the seat of government. The city of Ashur was not the capital of a large kingdom in historical times, but was ruled by patesis. Sufficient evidence of this is at hand and also of the approximate time when the new power arose. Tiglathpileser I. lived about 1100 B.C. In one of his inscriptions he states that he restored a temple in Ashur and that this temple had been built six hundred and forty-one years before the time of his grandfather, who had re- paired it sixty years previously. The original 180 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA builder was Shamslii-Adad, patesi of Ashur, son of Ishmi-Dagan, patesi of Ashur. About 1800 b.c, at the time of the Second Dynasty of Babylon, there were accordingly patesis of Ashur who were dependent either upon Babylonia or Mesopotamia, more likely upon the former. The same situation may without hesitation be assumed for the time when the city of Ashur is first clearly mentioned. This occurs in a letter of the time of Khammurabi, when apparently it lay within his dominion. The names of four other patesis are known to us from their own inscriptions, viz., Shamshi-Adad and his father, Igur-Kappapu, Irishu and his father.^ The first king of Assyria whose date can be approximately fixed is Ashur-rim-nishi-shu, the contemporary of Kara-indash of Babylon. Between 1800 and 1500 b.c. Ashur was, therefore, independent; its patesis call themselves kings, and, possibly under the influence of a new immi- gration, have begun to extend their borders. The cause and the conditions under which this was possible were akin to those which made the Kas- sites masters of Babylonia and gave Mesopotamia to the Mitani. Tumultuous times offered to vigor- ous rulers a favorable opportunity to found a kingdom for themselves. On the other hand, the 1 The German excavations at Kalah-Shergat have lately brought to light the names of a large number of such Patesis, names which, for the most part, are to be found in later inscriptions that are not yet published. RISE OP THE LAND OF ASHUR 181 separation which resulted between the two parts of the formerly united land, through the rule of two foreign peoples, made it possible for the interven- ing portion to found a state by itself. Before we enter upon the history of this new kingdom it will be of advantage to ask what it was in the general breakdown of Semitism at this time that secured the stability and power of the Semites of Ashur which from that time forward gave success to its arms, and what was the character of this future ruler of the Orient? The Assyrian type is markedly differentiated from the Babylonian, which as we have seen is the result of a mixture of races. The numerous Assyrian representations show us a sharply defined physiognomy, exactly that which it is cus- tomary to regard as Semitic ; it is the type we call "Jewish." Our designation is erroneous in so far as this type is wholly different from the Arabic in which we would naturally look for the purest Semitic type, if, indeed, we are at all justified in speaking of pure Semites. On the other hand, it corresponds essentially to the modern Armenian, whose language is Indo-Germanic. The explana- tion of this does not fall to the task of the histo- rian; he has to do with the history of peoples and takes language as a useful mark of differenti- ation. The recognition of physical peculiarities as a determining principle in matters of race is 182 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA quite a diiferent thing, for racial connections and linguistic divisions are matters entirely distinct. How the Assyrians developed their type, and to what larger group it is to be referred does not concern us greatly here, and the answer is diffi- cult owing to the lack of sufficient data. Start- ing with physical anthropological traits, it has been suggested that a Mesopotamian Canaanite- Armenian group may be differentiated, and this is supported by facts of histoiy. It is to be observed that Assyria was as much affected by Canaanite immigration as Babylonia was, if not more. The fusion of races consequent thereon may, there- fore, appear in the Assyrian type. Thus Canaan- ite ideas persisted longer in Assyria, which was, moreover, in closer proximity to countries of Canaanite population. The god Dagon, for exam- ple, was worshipped by the later Assyrians. It is, however, sufiScient for us to note the readily recog- nized Assyrian type. The question then arises: Whence came the remarkable superiority of this people over the other nations of Western Asia? It must have been due chiefly to two facts; national organiza- tion and social conditions. Assyria must have possessed until the time of Shalmaneser II. and Adad-nirari III., when it outrivalled Babylonia, a free class of agriculturalists of its own, whereas the more economically developed country, with RISE OF THE LAND OF ASHUR 183 the oldest civilization, was under a feudal, ecclesi-' astical system on whieli its population was wholly dependent. Hence the weakness of Babylonia. She had no army of her own, but depended for her defence upon allies whose intentions were often doubtful. Assyria, on the other hand, as late as Shalmaneser II., called out the militia when important occasions arose. Tiglathpileser III. attempted, as we shall see, to deliver the agricul- tural class from the chains of serfdom, which, in the interim, had developed in Assyria, and the reaction followed under Sargon. In the mean- time Assyria had indeed attained to the height of her power, the way for which had been pre- pared by Tiglathpileser; but she failed to reach a true development. The brief success which followed was without lasting influence and is attributable to the other side of her national or- ganization whose foundation was laid in freedom. The growth of a patesidom into a kingdom, as happened in the case of Assyria, was possible only at a time when the city rulers could command a force fit for combat. To what extent it may have been connected with the entrance of a new popu- lation into Ashur and Assyria we know not. We are, however, inclined to assume some connection. Just as David with a trustworthy band was able in a period of general disorganization to make himself king over a state made up of several 184 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA tribes, so, to a greater extent did the patesis of Ashur. Assyria's strength as opposed to the industrially developed region of the lower Eu- phrates valley rested, in the first place, upon an army. This was the necessary condition of its rise and rule. It was thus possible for the land to produce a peasant or agricultural class. When at a later period this class was jeopardized, and the efforts of Tiglathpileser III. to save it proved fruitless, mercenaries from every land, subju-, gated and barbarian, were recruited, and with these Sargon and his successors waged their wars. With these it was possible to hold the Orient in subjection so long as money and booty were abun- dant; but after a heavy blow, and with the war chest exhausted, it was impossible to recover. Assyria's power, therefore, lay in her army and her people. WTien these changed her whole basis was changed. Whereas formerly she was always able to rise again after defeat, when she became Babylonianized and was ruled over by a military and priestly caste supported by mercenary troops, and without a national population, she was doomed to disappear. The first accounts which we have of the king- dom of Assyria, which arose by conquest in the seventeenth or sixteenth century e.g., reveal the new state. A king of Babylon, whose name is not preserved, utters his maledictions in an in- RISE OF THE LAND OF ASHUR 185 scription upon all of his successors who should not show a proper regard for the work of restora- tion he had performed upon a certain building, as follows : ' ' That prince shall be accursed, never shall he be glad of heart, so long as he reigns war and battle shall not cease, during his reign brother shall devour brother, the husband shall forsake his wife, and the wife her husband, and the mother shall bar the door against her daughter." Then as a mark of the time he adds : ' ' The treasures of Babylon shall come to Suri and Assyria. The king of Babylon shall bring [to the city of Ashur] to the prince of Ashur the treasures of his pal- ace." Here we find Suri and Assyria mentioned together. Suri lay about the centre of Mesopo- tamia. Ashur has as yet no king; it is a "prince" who appears as rival, and the evil which is here predicted found frequent fulfilment in later times. From another source which dates also from that time we learn that Assyria was dependent upon Babylonia. We have a remarkable letter from an unnamed Babylonian king, perhaps Mero- dach-baladan I., to a patesi whose territory must have lain in the neighborhood of Assyria,^ and who was a natural opponent of the Assyrian king. He had made all manner of proposals to the king of Babylonia, all of which were designed to aid ^ Arpach, on the east, or Mitani, on the west, has the best claim to consideration. 186 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA him in getting possession of Assyria. But the latter discovered his intentions and declined, refusing to extend to him recognition as king, and declaring himself to be thoroughly satisfied with things as they were. The condition of affairs was then as follows: During the life of the writer's father (Melishikhu?) the king of Assyria, Ninih- tukulti-Ashur, had fled to Babylon and found refuge there. He was "sent back to his own land," which means that the insurrection was quelled, and the major domo, who had fled with him, was appointed regent. The king was retained in Babylon, of course, only in accordance "with his own wish." Assyria appears here as a vassal state of Babylonia, and completely under her domination. The original dependence of Ashur upon Babylon is further expressly declared in the claim of Burna-buriash. It is further supported by an inscription which the royal scribe Marduk-nadin- aklii, either a Babylonian or of Babylonian descent, inscribed in the reign of Ashur-uballit. He worshipped Marduk, the god of Babylon, as his lord and built his house under the protection of the temple of Marduk. The god of Babylon must, accordingly, have been regarded at this time as the patron god of Ashur, that is, Babylon must shortly before have held Assyria as a prov- ince. The relation was recognized down to the RISE OF I'HE LAND OF ASHUR 187 latest times in the cult. Again and again the god of Babylon is mentioned with the god of Ashur, and the efforts of Sargon, who delights to empha- size this relation between Mardnk and Ashur, are clearly connected with such ancient traditions. CHAPTER IV THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE A. ITS EISE The severance of the relation of dependence upon Babylonia was naturally the aim of the first period of Assyrian development. We are fortunately able to follow the progress of her relations to Babylon almost from the beginning by means of an important document. Under Adad-nirari III. all the compacts and wars between the two coun- tries were tabulated in connection with a brief presentation of their mutual relationships. This docxunent is commonly known by the somewhat inappropriate title "Synchronous History." It gives in brief the important contemporaneous events in the two kingdoms. The beginning of the clay tablet on which this history is preserved is broken off, and the first event which appears relates to the agreement between Karaindash and Ashur-rim-nishi-shu of the fifteenth century. The details of the compact are not given. It merely records that the two states concluded an agree- ment with reference to the delimitation of their respective territories. It is more than probable that the details of the compact were no longer 188 THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 189 discoverable by the keepers of Adad-nirari's archives, nothing more being known than was found in the royal inscriptions. The same is true of a compact between the next named king of Assyria, Buzur-Ashur, and Burna-buriash (I.?) which brings us down to the time immediately preceding the Tel-Amarna period. ASHUR^UBALLIT, from whom we have a letter that was sent to Amenophis IV. of Egypt, lived in the Tel-Amarna age. By the help of this letter and other aids we can follow his career. In this letter he com- plains of preferences shown to the king of Mitani, and, as we have already seen, it was exactly this territory which, in the eyes of Assyria, was the first to be coveted. He mentions also letters which had been written by his ' ' father, ' ' ^ Ashur-nadin- akhi, to Amenophis III. A letter of Burna-buriash to Amenophis IV. demands, at the same time, a refusal of the Assyrian request for support on the ground that Assyria was his vassal. And Ashur-uballit 's great-grandson, Adad-nirari, calls attention to the fact that the royal salutation of his great-grandfather was recognized in distant lands, which means that Ashur-uballit 's diplo- matic efforts to secure alliances had met with • He was his grandfather, for in a recently discovered inscription he calls himself " the son of Irba-Adad," who was the son of Ashur- nadin-akhi. 190 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA success despite all the letters of the Babylonian advising against it, and he was recognized by Egypt as independent king. He was also suc- cessful against the kings of Mitani. We have an account of a victory which he won over them, in which Nineveh, then, as we have seen, in the pos- session of Dushratta, must have fallen to Ashur- uballit. He there undertook the restoration of the temple of the goddess Ishtar who was at one time carried down to Egypt. He appears to have been the first Assyrian who took the title "king of the World." This, however, may have been only temporarily. With respect to Babylonia under Burna-buriash, or his successor, Kara- indash II., he adopted the policy tu felix Austria nube. Kara-indash married his daughter and to them was born Kadashman-Kharbe, whose policy and relation to Assyria we have already learned.^ We have also seen that the murder of Kadashman- Kharbe offered a welcome opportunity to Ashur- uballit to interpose in Babylonian affairs. It is highly probable that during the remainder of his long life he was the power behind the throne of his great-grandson, Kurigalzu, who was still in his minority. This relation of guardianship, however, neces- sarily gave rise to friction as soon as the young king reached his majority and was able to follow > Vid. p. 83. THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 191 his own policy of state. It is recorded that a war was waged between Bel-nirari, Ashur-uballit's successor and Kurigalzu which resulted in the defeat of the Babylonians. The delimitation referred to was connected with the territory "from the border of Mitani (Shubari) as far as Babylonia. ' ' Arak-den-il,^ the next king of Assyria, came into conflict only with Northern peoples : he held ia check the Suti, the Bedouins of the steppe, and the Aramzean hordes who sprang up. His son was ADAD-NIRARI I., CIR. 1300-1270. Under him Assyria reaped the fruit of previous wars. He overthrew the kingdom of Mitani and became "king of the World" by the possession of Mesopotamia. This Babylon naturally enough could not view with equanimity. She was willing enough to leave the war with Mitani to Assyria — but the possession of the country, in view of its important position on the line of communication with the North and West she coveted for herself. War broke out under Nazi-Maruttash, the son of Kurigalzu. Assyria was victorious, and a boun- dary line between the territories was fixed which ran from the Sindjar range eastward across the Tigris to the mountains of the Lulumi. Assyria ' Inscriptions that were recently found at Kaleh-Shergat show that this is the name generally written Pu-diAl. 192 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA thus maintained the upper part of the territory between the rivers, the lower portion fell to Babylonia. SHALMANESER I., CIR. 1270 '^ completed the work of his father. He conquered the provinces of Mitani on the west of the Euphrates, viz., Khanigalbat and Mutsri, and secured Mesopotamia by subduing the Aramaeans, who were constantly reaching out in this direction, and by pushing forward between the rivers in the direction of Armenia where he planned for the settlement of Assyrian colonies. Assyria, it is evident, had a superfluous and vigorous popula- tion which needed an outlet — it was still a land of agriculturalists. Shalmaneser 's colonies dem- onstrated their power to live. Notwithstanding the lack of support from the mother-land after they were founded they still existed after these regions had been twice wrested from Assyria, once after the reign of Tukulti-ninib I., and again after that of Tiglathpileser I. When Ashur-natsir-pal marched into Armenia about 860 e.g., he found these colonies still in existence through the Assyr- ian settlers had suffered greatly. Assyria's power of expansion is further attested by the cuneiform inscriptions from Cappadocia with their numer- ous Assyrian names. Their appearance there must also be connected with the successes of this period. THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 193 The old city, Ashur, was no longer suitable as a capital for the newly expanded empire. Shal- maneser, therefore, to meet the demands of the new conditions, moved his residence farther to the north, on the left bank of the Tigris. The name of the new capital was Kalkhi, on the site of the modern Nimrud, between the Tigris and the Upper Zab. The importance of this city to Assyria when in control of Mesopotamia is proved by the fact that when her power declined Ashur again became the capital, but when she rose again under Ashur-natsir-pal Kalkhi was chosen anew. When Mitani was disposed of and the posses- sion of Mesopotamia was assured the only ques- tion was whether Assyria should await attack by Babylonia or take the initiative herself. The lat- ter policy had always prevailed in her previous history. War had already been waged under Shalmaneser I. with Kadashman-Buriash, and it was continued under his successor. During the reign of Kadashman-Kharbe, the second successor of Bit-ili-ashu, with whom he fought several engagements, TUKULTI-NINIB conquered Babylon, which at the time was seri- ously pressed by Elam. He thus made himself master of the whole of Babylonia. This was accomplished as the result of two expeditions. On the first one Bit-ili-ashu was conquered and 194 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA taken prisoner. The second one had evidently as its object the suppression of a revolt under Adad- nadin-shum or Kadashman-Kharbe II. We have a copy of one of Tukulti-Ninib 's seals that was made by Sennacherib from the original found during his reign in which the titles run : ' ' Tukulti- Ninib, king of the World, son of Shalmaneser, conqueror of the land of Karduniash." A note adds that the original was made ' ' 600 years before Sennacherib" — a welcome remark which enables us to fix the time approximately at 1275 b.c.^ Tukulti-Ninib did not assume the title "king of Babylon," but appointed Adad-shum-iddin to rule under his protection. This relation lasted for seven years, and during the rule of Adad-shum- iddin and his followers the statue of Marduk remained in Ashur whither it had been taken by Tukulti-Ninib. Then the Babylonian nobility arose, drove out the Assyrians and placed Adad- shum-utsur upon the throne. When we compare ^The " 600 " is in all probability only a round number, and it is possible that we ought to reduce the date to about 1255. 600, or the sar, plays about the same r61e in the Babylonian numerical system that 1000 does with us. Compare the Latin sexcenties. A saros would, therefore, have for the Assyrians about the same signifi- cance aa a millennium has for us. [See, however, the definite num- ber 641 + 60 given by Tig. I., p. 179.] Nabuna'id tells us that he rebuilt the temple of Anemit in Sippar, which for " 800 years," from the days of Shagashalti-buriash, the son of Kudur-Bel, had not been rebuilt; in another inscription that he rebuilt the Sun- temple in Larsa that Hammu-rabi had rebuilt " 700 years " before Buma-buriash. — Craig. THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 195 the similar situation at the death of Sennacherib, and the uprising at the close of Esarhaddon's reign, we get the key to the understanding of that which the chronicle, from which these facts are gleaned, says in this connection: "Ashur-natsir- pal, his son, and the chiefs of Assyria revolted and deposed him from the throne. In Kar- Tukulti-Ninib they imprisoned him in a house and smote him with their weapons." From this we must conclude that Tukulti-Ninib, like later Assyrian kings similarly situated, allowed his politics to be shaped too much by Babylonian influence. This would naturally excite discontent in Assyria owing to her fear lest the superiority of the more highly developed Babylonians should deprive her of supremacy. The insurrection was, therefore, an Assyrian-military one called forth by the danger which threatened from the pre- ponderance of Babylonian influence. It is possi- ble that the Assyrian revolutionists acted in concert with the Babylonians. One inscription records the building of "Kar- Tukulti-Ninib." From this it appears that it was a sort of new city added on to the old city of Ashur. It must have been here that the king had his palace within which he met his death. Appar- ently the construction of the city was connected with political plans which aroused opposition to him. Our suspicions are here aroused for the 196 BABYLONIA AND ASSYKIA first time of the presence of Babylon's imperial politics in Assyria which was the natural conse- quence of its possession of Babylon and its claim to world-sovereignty. If it was the aim of the insurrectionists to break away from Babylonia it was effectively attained, for now the war might begin afresh and Mesopo- tamia, especially, be defended against the enemy which had of late grown in strength. Of Ashur- natsir-pal I. nothing more is known. Assyria under him and his successors, the two brothers, Ashur-nirari I. and Nahu-[dayan], who ruled together, appears to have been reduced to the position she occupied prior to her expansion under Ashur-uballit. The political schisms which ensued upon the insurrection, and the later occupancy of the throne by the two brothers was doubtless largely responsible for the decline. The tone assumed by the Babylonian king in a letter addressed to them is in marked contrast to the usual courteous manner of speech. They are no longer addressed as ''brothers," but sharply reprimanded as inferiors. In consonance with this change of tone the Babylonian assumes the title ' ' king of the World. ' ' Assyria was evidently reduced again to the "land of Ashur," and was as before a feudality of Babylonia. From this point the connection of events is diffi- cult to follow on account of the fragmentary state THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 197 of the tablets. But it is most probable that this condition continued and that an effort was made in Ashur to throw off the Babylonian yoke, which resulted in placing B el-kudur-utsur on the throne. He fell in battle with the king of Babylon, who, it is to be supposed, was Merodach-baladan from whom the account comes. Ninib-apal-ekur suc- ceeded him and the length of his rule did not exceed the twelve remaining years of Merodach- baladan, inasmuch as it was Ashur-dan who was involved in war with his successor, Zamama-shum- iddin, who reigned only one year. The details are uncertain, but it is apparent that Ashur and Babylon were both actuated in these wars by a desire of predominance. B. THE SECOND ADVANCE OF ASSYRIA Babylonia continued to assert her superior strength under Marduk-bal-iddin I., for he boasts of a victory over Assyria, under Ninib-apal-ekur, or his son Ashur-dan, and calls himself "king of the World." But under his successor, Zamama- shum-iddin, a victory on Babylonian territory east of the Lower Zab, was won by Assyria under ASHUR-DAN, CIR. 1200 B.C. This victory, however, did not mean the recon- ^ quest of Mesopotamia. We have already seen that even the first kings of the Pashe dynasty still 198 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA held it: Nebuchadrezzar I. advanced again as far as Palestine. Ashur-dan was succeeded by MutakJcil-Nusku. His son was ASHUR-RISH-ISHI, the contemporary and rival of Nebuchadrezzar I. According to the "Synchronous History" the Assyrian came off triumphant in repeated battles. He reconquered Mesopotamia, and one of his inscriptions speaks also of his chastisement of the Aramaean hordes, and of successful under- takings against the Lulumi in the Western Zagros range, and of others against the Kutians in the North. The work which he accomplished for Assyria in this renewed extension of her power resembled that which had formerly been done by Adad-nirari I. But in the reign of his successor, TIGLATHPILESER I. (CIR. 1100 B.C.) there was a repetition of the successes and subse- quent collapse of Assyria under Shalmaneser I. and Tukulti-Ninib. The first step was to secure Mesopotamia again by renewed expeditions to the North and by the reconquest of Khanigalbat and Mutsri on the west of the Euphrates. At this time there was in this region another of those great migrations taking place which can be fol- lowed so instructively especially in the Orient. It was that of the peoples of Kummukh, Muski, THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 199 and Kaska, who, as we have already seen, were connected with the Hittites. When our informa- tion from Egyptian sources ceases we hear almost nothing of the Hittite kingdom in Asia Minor. In the Tel-Amarna period it exists beside the kingdom of Mitani, to which it is ethnically related and with which it is at war. In the suc- ceeding period, when the Egyptian power was on the decline, it extended itself over Syria and almost all of Northern Palestine, into which Hit- tite bands may have entered in earlier times. In the twelfth century Egyptian kings fought with the Hittites for the possession of Canaan, and Kamses II. concluded a defensive alliance with the Hittite king, Kheta-sar. The dominating force in this treaty was clearly the Hittite, and notwith- standing the pretentious claims of the Egyptian king he virtually played the role of a dependent although formally recognized as an ally on equal terms. It was an alliance common enough every- where in the Orient and in antiquity, and such as must always result where unequal powers combine. The actual relation appears also very clearly in the delimitation of their provincial boundaries. Egypt acknowledged as Hittite territory every- thing to the north of Nahr-el-Kelb (Dog Eiver) near Beirut, if not also all the country to the north of Mount Carmel, that is, all of Northern Phoenicia and Syria. 200 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA The migrations of the people of Kummukh and Muski thus show that the Hittite territory along the river Halys must have been overrun by new peoples in the time of Tiglathpileser I. As was usually the case, these peoples soon established homes for themselves in the land. If then a pow- erful state continued to exist on the Halys it must of necessity come into conflict with Tiglathpileser. For, on the one hand, the latter, through his victories along the Euphrates, had become neigh- bor to the Hittites and, on the other, he had taken possession of territory in IQianigalbat and Mutsri which the Hittites were bound to contest, and which separated them from the southern part of Asia Minor and Phoenicia. As in the case of Dushratta, it was necessary for him as ruler of Mesopotamia to repel the Hittites before he could take the next step and crown his ambition by an advance to the Phoenician coast. The account which tells of his victory over the Hittite king, . . . TesJiub, is only fragmentarily preserved.^ We have a large inscription of Tiglathpileser which recounts his wars in this region during his first five years. He began by purging the terri- tory to the north of Mesopotamia, by repelling the tribes that had forced their way in, or by compelling their submission, and he advanced in the direction of Armenia. He sought to establish • See p. 172. The first part of the name is not known. THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 201 Assyrian control over the same region that Shal- maneser had formerly settled with Assyrian col- onists. He further subjugated the Nairi Lands, the mountainous country to the south of Lake Van which separates Armenia from Mesopo- tamia. On one of these expeditions he erected at the source of the Subnat, the fountain head of the Tigris, his image which is still preserved with a brief inscription that tells of three such expedi- tions to the Nairi Lands. He also, like Shal- maneser, checked the Aramaean hordes who had spread out over the Mesopotamian steppes, and drove a portion of them across the Euphrates into the territory about Carchemish. He crossed the river himself and took six of their fortified towns "in the region of Mount Bishri." This region corresponds to that part of Bit-Adini on the right of the Euphrates, which in the time of Shalmaneser II. appears with Til-Basheri. Dur- ing the Crusades it was the feudal-tenure of Josce- lin of Tell-Bashir, who held it in fief from the District of Edessa. He also occupied Pitru at the junction of the Euphrates and Sagur, the Pethor of the Old Testament (erroneously said to have been the home of Balaam), and peopled it with colonists from Assyria. Following further in the path of Shalmaneser I. he subjugated Melitene (Khanigalhat) and further extended his conquests over Mutsri, which was then in possession of the 202 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Kumani. He thus restored the boundaries of the old Mesopotamian kingdom. Nothing now stood in the way of his occupation of Northern Phoenicia, and we read consequently of his setting sail at Arvad upon an ocean trip as a mighty huntsman of the denizens of the deep. As landlubbers the Assyrians always regarded themselves as heroes whenever they ventured upon the mysteries of the high seas. Tiglath- pileser mentions on this occasion an exchange of presents with the king of Egypt who, among other gifts, presented him with a crocodile (namsuch). Who this king of Egypt was we are not informed. We see, however, from this notice that the inter- course between the civilized countries was always the same as it appears from the detailed informa- tion of the Tel-Amarna Letters, and that- the Egyptian kings, though they exerted little influ- ence in Palestine at this time, when the kingdoms of Saul and David were shaping, had, neverthe- less, not allowed it to drop wholly out of sight. The correspondence between the kings has not been preserved for us. When, however, we remember that shortly prior to this time Nebu- chadrezzar asserted his authority over Northern Phoenicia the inference is natural that weightier matters were discussed in connection with this courteous exchange of royal gifts and that an understanding was arrived at as to the boundaries THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 203 of their respective spheres of influence or interest in Palestine. The sending of presents to the new ruler of the region which Ramses acknowledged as Hittite indicates the formal recognition of Assyria as the rightful successor to Hittite claims. If formerly Burna-buriash complained of Pha- raoh's too great willingness to recognize Assyrian claims, Tiglathpileser, now that he held equal title, perhaps assumed the same attitude toward the Egyptian king as Kheta-sar had toward Ramses.^ When now the West had been secured atten- tion was naturally next given to the East. With this we come to that part of Tiglathpileser 's reign which corresponds to the role of Tukulti-Ninib. The Synchronous History speaks of two success- ful wars against Marduk-nadin-aklie of Babylon in which the North Babylonian cities and Baby- lon were taken, and a fragment of Tiglathpileser 's annuals tells of his entrance into the capital itself. This rapid advance, however, was followed by an equally rapid turn of fortune. When Senna- cherib conquered Babylon in 689 he found statues of gods which had been carried away from the city of Ehallati, by Marduk-nadin-akhi, "418 years before, in the time of Tiglathpileser." Marduk- nadin-akhi in one of his inscriptions bears the titles ''king of Sumer and Akkad," and "king of >P. 199. 204 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA the World." He, therefore, not only ruled the whole of Babylonia but had also re-established Babylonian rule in Mesopotamia. Consequently, Tiglathpileser must at one stroke have lost all which he had previously won. Assyria then stood exactly where it did after the overthrow of Tukulti-Ninib. ASHUR-BEL-KA.LA AND SHAMSHI-ADAD I., Tiglathpileser 's sons, occupied the throne after him. During this period Mesopotamia must have been chiefly under Babylonian influence. The spread of the Aramaeans nevertheless proves that Babylon did not vigorously assert her authority. Assyria was reduced again to the "Land of Ashur" and was, therefore, compelled to begin anew. But Babylonia was not now a formidable opponent, and peace existed between the two states. Ashur-bel-kala and Marduk-shapik-zer- mati of Babylon, who held the title "king of the World," and, therefore, like his predecessor, was in possession of Mesopotamia, entered into terms of peace. When the latter died and Adad-aplu- iddin ascended the throne the Assyrian Mng married his daughter, and, according to the Syn- chronous History, received with her "a large dowry. Thereafter the two peoples lived peace- ably with one another." Nothing is known to us of Ashur-bel-kala 's brother, Shamshi-Adad. And THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 205 of Ms son, Ashur-natsir-pal II., we know only the name from a hymn that has been preserved. Tradition is now practically silent for one hun- dred years, ^ during which we hear little or nothing of either Assyria or Babylonia. We learn from the later records of Shal- maneser II. that Ashur-irbi must have been king of Assyria at this time. He seems to have taken the initial step toward the recovery of the lost territory, for Shalmaneser discovered a statue of his son on the shore of the sea. This can only have been Lake Van or the Mediterranean Sea, and from the connection the latter is more proba- ble.^ Ashur-irbi then, like Tiglathpileser I., ad- vanced as far as the Phoenician coast. Whether his image was found among those to the north of Beirut on the Nahr-el-kelb, or still farther to the north, cannot be determined. At all events the statue seems to have been alone, for Shal- maneser says: **My statue (tsalmu) with his statue I set up." As we learn from another source during his reign Pitru, which had been taken by ' Few royal names, however, can be lacking, since six are known to us of the time between Tiglathpileser, 1100 and later, and 911, with which the Eponjrm-Lists begin, viz.: the two sons of Tiglath- pileser I., Ashur-natsir-pal II., lacuna?, Ashur-irbi (lacima), Tiglath- pileser II., Ashur-dan II. (p. 209). ' See monolith-inscription col. ii., 1. 10. Shalmaneser says that the statue of Ashur-irbi was "in the land of Atalur." In K. 4415, a geographical list, Atalur follows immediately upon Lebanon (Lib-na-nu) . — Craig. 206 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Tiglathpileser I., fell into the hands of the Ara- niEeans. This brings us to the most important movement of these times. C. THE ARAM^AN IMMIGRATION In addition to the immigrations of the Kassites from the east, and the Hittites (Mitani) from the northwest, the third Semitic immigration poured into Mesopotamia and Babylonia at this time. This was the Aramcean. We have already fre- quently noted that the Assyrian kings (Arak- den-il, Shalmaneser I., Ashur-rish-ishi, Tiglath- pileser I.), when they entered Mesopotamia, sought to hold in check, or repel beyond the Euphrates, the "Aramaean hordes" who were in possession. These nomadic Aramaeans, as they are expressly called by Tiglathpileser I., had, therefore, overrun the country, as early as 1300 B.C., in the same manner as the other two great immigrations had previously. Invited by the great steppes of Mesopotamia this was at first their natural halting place, and thence they moved southward toward Babylonia which, like the "Canaanites" and "Babylonian Semites" who moved in the same direction, they later occupied. And here we meet them fre- quently as Aramaean tribes when Babylon was under Assyrian domination, that is, under Tig- lathpileser III. and his successors. There they THE OLD ASSYRIAN EMPIRE 207 met with opposition in their movements from the Chaldeans who were pressing upward from the South. They were still further hindered from spreading over the country by the tribes which had preceded them and which were most closely related to them, the relation between them being exactly similar to that between the Hebrews and Canaanites. These advance tribes were those known as the Suti, who, as we Jiave already seen, were in possession of the Syrian desert during the reigns of Ashur-uballit and Kadashman-Kharbe. They were driven thence by the Aramaeans into Babylonia, and, in the twelfth century, they were described by the kings of the Sea-Lands as a destructive race. They were finally forced into the mountainous region on the east of the Tigris, and were still resident in Yamutbal in the time of Sargon II. At the close of the eighth century we can thus clearly see in Babylonia, as the result of these migrations, the successive layers of popu- lation which rose from the Suti and Aramaeans. As these tribes first entered the land when the Kassites, owing to the weakness of Babylonia, were able to establish their power, so they were able to spread out undisturbed after 1100, when neither Assyria nor Babylonia was in a position to offer an effective resistance. It is to this time then that we must refer the recorded devastation of Babylonia by the Suti, who were driven for- 208 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ward by the Aramasan tribes that were then enter- ing into possession of Northern Babylonia and later settled in the South. At the same time also they took possession of Mesopotamia which lay more exposed, and there events developed as usual in the course of all these immigrations. "Wliile in Babylonia they were pre- vented by the Chaldeans from entering the cities and were confined to the country regions, it was otherwise in Mesopotamia. There they took pos- session of the entire land. When the silence of Assyrian records is again broken we find Ara- maean cities and an Aramaean population in full control. Now the language of the Land of Suri has changed to Aramcean, and the words Syrians and Aramaeans, which originally connoted wholly different ideas, began to be synonymous. A clear instance of this is observable in the occupation of Pitru.^ Numerous similar occurrences must have been witnessed in Mesopotamia in the cen- tury following Tiglathpileser. But how did the Assyrian kings regard all this? Evidently they did not remain inactive, and we have already tried to show that a movement was directed against them under Ashur-irbi. The war which was waged was doubtless one of varying fortunes, and per- haps we can best picture the progress of events by recalling the course of the Chaldeans in Babylonia. » P. 201. CHAPTER V THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM Although Babylon and Assyria were powerless to protect Mesopotamia against the Aramaean migration they were able to dispute its possession with one another. We have already seen that Babylon was superior to Assyria after the reign of Tiglathpileser, and this state of affairs appears to have continued until the beginning of the "Chaldean dynasty." But as soon as the Assyr- ian records speak again the question of relative strength is settled beyond dispute. Henceforward all the kings of Assyria until the fall of the king- dom call themselves ''kings of the World." The first of these kings whose succession we can now follow uninterruptedly are : AsHUR-RiSH-iSHi, cir. 970. Tiglathpileser II., cir. 950. AsHUR-DAN II., cir. 930. Adad-nirari II. Of these the first is known to us only from a genealogy of his grandson in which Ashur-dan's name is also given. Of the last we have a brief inscription, and it is with his reign that the 209 210 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Bponym Canon begins which enumerates the Assyrian Eponyms in whose names the succes- sive years were dated. From this point on to the end of the kingdom each year of Assyrian history can at least be determined by its limmu, or archon. Each of these three kings bore the titles "king of the world, king of Ashur," which henceforth were constantly assumed. Harran and Ashur are the chief cities of the two parts of the land. But the one part is held entirely by an Aramtean population who in the old cities caused the old population the same troubles that the Chaldeans prepared for the Babylonians, and it contained beside a number of Aramasan cities whose princes seized every opportunity to strike for independ- ence or even the reins of government. Near to Harran there stood an Aramsean state, Bit-Adini, a counterpart to the dukedom Edessa during the Crusades, just as the Chaldean Bit-Dakuri existed near Babylon. Others still we shall have to note in the time of Ashur-natsir-pal.^ The subjugation of these states and tribes was, therefore, the first aim of Assyria, which refused to be made the sport of their desire for conquest as Babylonia was by the Chaldeans. ' Cf. also Bit-Agusi (or Blt-Gusi) and its relation to Arpad during the reigns of Shalmaneser II., Ashur-nirari II., and especially Tiglath- pileser III. THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 211 TUKULTI-NINIB II., 890-885, succeeded Adad-nirari II. On one of his expedi- tions to the "Nairi-Lands" he cut an inscription by the side of one of Tiglathpileser I. in the rock at the source of the Subnat. His son, Ashur- natsir-pal, and his grandson, Shalmaneser II., followed his example in this respect. The object of these expeditions of Tukulti-Ninib to the north was to secure the regions of Assyria that had been colonized by Shalmaneser I. and retaken by Tig- lathpileser. Their possession is, therefore, also presupposed under his son, ASHUR-NATSIE^PAL, 885-860, with whom our sources begin again to be more abundant. Detailed accounts of his expeditions have come down to us in several lengthy inscrip- tions. He is the most conspicuous figure in the work of establishing order in Mesopotamia and putting an end to the independence of the Ara- maean princes. He did away with the feudal sys- tem and established the country on a provincial basis. In the narrative of his deeds we gain con- siderable knowledge of the conditions which pre- vailed. In the very first year of his reign, 884, an insurrection broke out in the Aramaean state, Bit-Khadippi, on the lower Khabur. The rebels put to death their prince who had previously been 212 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA subjugated to Assyria and was loyal to his oath of allegiance, and placed in his stead a prince from the neighboring Bit-Adini near Harran, one of the arch-enemies of Assyria. Ashur-natsir-pal was in Kummukh on the Euphrates at the time and he advanced in all haste to Bit-Khadippi. The Aramaean princes of Shadikanna (or Gardi- kanna) and Shnna hastened to meet him on the way with their tribute as assurance of their sub- mission. Sura, the chief city of Bit-Khadippi, submitted on his arrival and delivered over their prince, Akhi-Yababa, but were made to pay the penalty of their temerity in the destruction of the city. Azil, a native sheikh, was appointed governor. The course of this revolt is typical of the most of the wars Assyria was forced to wage against the Aramaeans as well as with all other tribes similarly situated. Whenever a favorable oppor- tunity arose they sought to effect a union with others and then refused the allotted tribute, but offered little resistance to the Assyrian army. On the right bank of the Euphrates and lying between Syria and Babylonia, as the result of the Aramaean influx, Ashur-natsir-pal found three of these half-nomadic states, vis., Laki, Khindanu (at the mouth of the Kliabur), and Sukhi. These were subjugated as the result of several expedi- tions. We have previously seen in the history of THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 213 Babylonia that she also played a part in the war with the Sukhi. Generally speaking, all such insurrections sprang up not as a chance venture but with the encouragement of larger powers, in other words, Babylonia. In this way Babylon tried to regain her influence over Mesopotamia and abandoned the effort only when Assyria had established over it a provincial government. The worst enemy of Assyria was Aldiuni, the prince of Bit-Adini, the Aramaean state adjoining the region of Harran and dominating Northern Mesopotamia. He was the prime mover of most of the revolts among the small states on the river Khabur. As soon, therefore, as Ashur-natsir-pal had brought the peoples along the Khabur and Euphrates to submission he turned against this fomenter of trouble. Akliuni, and also one of his allies, Khabini of Tel-abnaya, promptly sub- mitted. On his expedition against Syria in the following year, 877, these regions were again traversed and tribute collected. Akhuni was even compelled to join the Assyrian army. Aramaean tribes in the northernmost part of Syria, beyond the Euphrates, were likewise forced to pay trib- ute. These invasions of the Aramaeans were more of the nature of military skirmishes than of seri- ous wars; the restless Bedouins had already become settled in the land and readily submitted on the approach of a large army. 214 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA The most of Ashur-natsir-pal's expeditions were to the Nairi-Lands of the North, which either had to be reconquered or Assyrian authority rein- forced within them. The Assyrians who had been settled in the regions to the west and south of Mount Masius had been severely dealt with by the surrounding population and forced to fly for refuge to the mountains. These were restored to their place, and the province with its capital, Tuskha, in which Ashur-natsir-pal erected a pal- ace, was established anew. At the same time. Tela, another rebel stronghold guarded by a triple wall and settled with Assyrians, was razed to the ground. Three thousand of its warriors fell in its defence, many were taken alive and mutilated and young women were burnt in the flames. A similar lot overtook the rebellious city of Kinabu whose governor, Khulai, was flayed and his skin nailed upon the walls of Damdamusa which he had attempted to take. In other expeditions Ashur- natsir-pal crossed the Tigris and penetrated far- ther into the Nairi-Lands. He likewise crossed over beyond Arbela and up to the Urumia Sea where, among other conquests, he reduced Khu- buskia, Zamua and Gilzan. When this work in the North was accomplished Ashur-natsir-pal, like Tiglathpileser I., marched toward Phoenicia. Setting out from the con- quered state, Bit-Adini, he crossed the Euphrates THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 215 by means of rafts buoyed up by inflated sheep- skins — a means still in vogue — and advanced along the left bank to Carcbemish, the Hittite capital. Sangara, the king of the ''land of Khatti," paid tribute and added his contingent to the Assyrian army. The Syrian state Patia, now in the hands of the Aramaeans, lay to the west of the territory of Carcbemish and beyond the Sagur and included the region north of the sea of Antiochia, known as the Amq, and ex- tended southward as far as the Orontes. Azaz was first conquered; and when the Assyrian army had crossed the Afrin and stood before the capital, Kunalua, King Lubarna (or Liburna)' paid tribute and joined his troops to the Assyrian army. Gusi, the prince of the Aramaean state Takham, near Arpad, found it expedient to do likewise. Leaving Kunalua the army marched across the Kara-su, in the western portion of the Amq, and then turned southward and crossed the Orontes to the south of the lake of Antioch. Here in the northernmost highlands of the Phoenician coast, which had belonged to Patin and was named by Ashur-natsir-pal "Lukhuti," he founded an Assyrian colony, Aribua, thus following the ex- ample of Shalmaneser I. in Nairi. The march was continued southward along the Mediterra- nean, where offerings were made to the gods. The 216 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA place where this occurred must have been on the Nahr-el-Kelb, where one of the weather-beaten Assyrian reliefs probably represents the monu- ment of victory which the king caused to be sculp- tured in the rock. The cities of Arvad, Gebal, Sidon, Tyre and several in the highlands, sent their tribute. Another detachment of the army was sent northward to Mount Amanus to cut cedars for the buildings in Nineveh. Tyre is the most southerly of the Phoenician cities that is men- tioned in his narrative. The dynasty of Omri was then ruling over Israel, and there the move- ments of the Assyrian army must have been fol- lowed with some anxiety. Ashur-natsir-pal did not, however, venture the march farther south- ward, for the southern regions were tributary to or even under the protection of Damascus, which at that time controlled Syria. With her Ashur- natsir-pal ventured nothing. In fact this state of which he was in dread is not once referred to in his inscriptions. He exacted tribute of those states only which were not under the influence of Damascus. In other respects the expedition of Ashur-natsir-pal was almost a repetition of the one by Tiglathpileser I. The latter seems to have been his great exemplar. His undertakings seem to have followed in the same course and to have had similar results. In one of his inscriptions he follows closely the deeds of Tiglathpileser and THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 217 repeats a large section of one of his inscriptions. The events of the last years of his reign and his less successful undertakings are wanting also in his inscriptions. If, as we have previously seen, the success of Tiglathpileser's expeditions to the West was to be judged by his victory over the Hittite king it is interesting to note what attitude this great power of Asia Minor now maintained toward the advancing Assyrians. In the eighth century it reappears again as Muski (Phrygia). In the annals of Ashur-natsir-pal a brief account is given of successes won over the Muski. Appar- ently he felt the necessity of putting on record some statements which would imply a success there corresponding to that of his great predeces- sor. Although we must assume that his victories were unimportant this reference to the Asia Minor power is nevertheless significant for the larger connection of the history of Asia Minor. The most important work of Ashur-natsir-pal 's reign was the establishment of Assyrian suprem- acy in Mesopotamia. As Shalmaneser I. had previously done, he moved the capital from Ashur to Kalkhi as better suited to the new require- ments of government. It was here that Layard unearthed the ' ' North-West ' ' palace of this king. Evidence of his efforts to improve the city is found in his laying a conduit which connected the city with the river Zab. His successor was 218 BABYLONIA AND ASSYKIA SHALMANESER II., 860-825 B.C., wlio carried on the work of his father from the point where he was obliged to lay it down. We have already learned of his success in Babylonia.^ In Mesopotamia he brought the subjugated Ara- maean vassal princes under Assyrian rule. The regions to the north which his father had reduced he held in subjection and added others to the realm. He completed the work which had been left imdone by his predecessor in Syria and waged a successful war against Damascus. During the first years of his reign Shalmaneser II. devoted his attention to Mesopotamia. In three expeditions, 859, 858, 857, Akliuni of Bit- Adini, who had again revolted, was compelled to submit, and his territory finally annexed as an Assyrian province and in part settled by Assyr- ians. In 854 the same fate overtook another Aramaean prince, Giammu, in the valley of the Balikh. Gradually Aramaean independence in Mesopotamia was crushed and the inhabitants forced to become citizens of Assyria. Syria and Palestine were the next in order, as in the case of Ashur-natsir-pal, to invite the conquering ambition of Shalmaneser. Patin, the northern part of Syria, had yielded to his father, and now that it was out of the way it remained to 'P. 104 ff. THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 219 subdue the state that ruled over the whole of Coele-Syria and Palestine. In the year 854 he crossed the Euphrates near Til-Barsip, which not long before was Akhuni's capital but was now under an Assyrian governor. He descended to Pitru, which also had been taken from the Ara- maeans and was now under Assyrian rule. At this point he received the tribute of the Syrian princes, who willingly submitted or had previously been subjected. These were Sangar of Carehe- mish, who in 877 had bowed before Ashur-natsir- pal, Kundaspi of Kummukh, Arame of Gusi, Lalli of Melitene, who also had paid tribute to Ashur- natsir-pal, Khayna^ of Gabar (Sam'al), Kalpar- unda of Patin, and Grurgum. The last two ruled over parts of the former kingdom of Patin in the region of Senjirli. From this point he marched toward Khalman (Aleppo), which immediately yielded, and Shalmaneser offered up a sacrifice to the god of the city, Adad or Eamman. Proceeding southward he came to the regions bordering on Hamath that stood under the in- fluence of Damascus. Irkhulini, the prince of Hamath, was either an ally of, or under tribute to Bir-idri^ of Damascus. The latter advanced ' In a Canaanite inscription from Senjirli in Sam'al Kalummfi, his son is called Bar-Khaya. [Kalummli speaks Aramaic (6ar), though he writes in Canaanite.] ''i.e. Benhadad of the O. T. This Hebrew form (nin |3) appears to have arisen through the mistake of a scribe who con- 220 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA against the Assyrians and ttie opposing armies met at Karhar near Hamatli. Shalmaneser men- tions the following vassal kings and princes of Syria who were compelled to join her ranks, viz., Irkhulina of Hamath, Aiab of Israel, the princes of Kue (Southeastern Cilicia), Mutsri, Irqana, Matinbaal of Arvad, the North Phoenician princes of Usana and Siana, Gindibu the Arabian (this is the first mention of Arabians) and Ba'sa (Baasha) of Ammon. Shalmaneser claims a great victory over the allied forces.^ But when he returned to Assyria Damascus remained in all its extent as before. Owing to the developments in Babylonia in 852 and 851 it was not until 849 that he again crossed to the west and then with no founded the name of the divinity Bir with har, the Aramaic for son (Hebr. p, ben), and the final letter d was wrongly read r, which it closely resembles both in the earlier and later script. The LXX. reads 'ASep and the Assyrian 'idri. — Craig. ■ Mon. II., 88, gives a detailed account of the victory. "I approached the cities of Irkhulini ... his capital I took, his booty, possessions, the property of his palace I brought out, and burned his palaces. . . . Karkar his royal city I devastated, destroyed and burnt with fire. 1200 chariots, 1200 horses, 20,000 warriors of Bir-'idri of Damascus; 700 chariots, 700 horses, 10,000 warriors of Irkhulini of Hamath, 2000 chariots, 10,000 warriors of Ahah of Israel, 500 of the Kueans, 1000 warriors of Mutsri, 10,000 of the Irqanateans, 200 of the Arvadites, . . 10,000 of the Sianean Adoni-baal, 1000 camels of the Arabian Gindibu, 1000 warriors of the Ammonite Ba'sa, . . . 14,000 (of the united forces of these 12 kings) I slew with the weapons, like the storm- god Ramman. I reigned (destruction) upon them." According to this there fell in battle 14,000 of the combined infantiy, which amounted to 62,900 (Israel provided more than half of the war chariots), of which only 20,000 belonged to Bir-'idri.— Crai^. THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 221 more decisive results. The same is true of his descent upon Hamath from Mount Amanus, in the tributary state of Patin, in the following year, 848. Victory is recorded in the monuments but results prove that in this, as in many another case ancient and modern, the scribe was mightier than the Tartan. Thus it appears that Damascus proved her ability to defend herself successfully. The Assyrian army found itself confronted by well organized troops, not by a militia force of uncivilized tribes. Shalmaneser felt, therefore, that the necessity was all the greater that this foe who blocked his way to the control of Syria and Palestine should be conquered. Three years later, in 845, he collected the army "of the land" and set out on another expedition. Again his opponent took the field with an unusually strong army, and Shalmaneser won the same kind of a "victory" as before. It was not until 842, when a change of rulers took place in Damascus, that he achieved success by winning over some of the vassals. Bir-idri died and Hazael ascended the throne of Damascus. An insurrection in Israel placed Jehu upon the throne and he sought aid from Assyria. The Old Testament narratives indicate that the prophets of Israel (Elisha) had an important hand in this crisis and in the overthrow of the family of Ahab, which was allied to Tyre. Elisha was also appar- 222 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ently connected with the elevation of Hazael to the throne (2 Ki. viii.), and we must assume that a similar state of things existed in Damascus, for Hazael was not the son of his predecessor. The same movement which overthrew the dynasty of Omri in Israel must have, as is hinted in the Old Testament, been opposed to the throne of Damas- cus. Assyria, doubtless, incited the opposition or, at least, covertly abetted it, although the new king of Damascus disappointed the hopes of the diplo- mats at Kalkhi. We have often previously seen how vassals were wont to throw off their allegi- ance on the death of the king, and so it happened now. Damascus was deserted by her former allies and Hazael stood alone. Shalmaneser marched from the north along the coast, and then past Bei- rut, where he sculptured an image of himself on the rocks of the Nahr-el-Kelb, toward Damascus. Hazael attempted to block his way between Mount Hermon and Anti-Lebanon and failing in this he was compelled to fall back behind the walls of Damascus. Shalmaneser laid siege to the city for a time, but this proved ineffectual. His battering rams met more serious hindrance than the clay walls of provincial towns. He was consequently compelled to satisfy himself with the devastation of the land as far as the Hauran, and, after receiv- ing from Tyre and Sidon the price they always paid for peace, and exacting of Jehu of Israel the oath THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 223 of allegiance, lie returned to Nineveh. A sixth attempt was made in 839 with no better results. Damascus asserted its independence. Thus the state that proved the barrier to Assyria's advance on Palestine remained. The whole course of Israelitish history was determined by this fact. The next one hundred years Israel and Judah stood under the influence of Damascus, and it was not until she had fallen (731) that the fate of Israel was sealed. After 839 Shalmaneser desisted from further attacks on Damascus. Israel and the rest of Palestine were left free to manage their own affairs with Damascus. If for the present Coele- Syria and Palestine had evaded the grasp of Assyria nothing remained for the latter but a fur- ther subjugation of Northern Syria and further expansion in the direction of Asia Minor. Meli- tene (Khanigalbat), Patin, and the Amq had acknowledged Assyrian sovereignty. Shalman- eser had, therefore, driven northward the old Hit- tite state, or as it was then called, Muski, to its own territory on the river Halys. Now he reached out from the south over the Amanus and into the region of the Taurus. Kue at the beginning was tributary to Damascus, but now in the years 840, 835 and 834 it was conquered and Kirri was appointed king in Tarsus instead of his brother Kate. On the north of the Taurus Tabal, with 224 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA its independent chiefs, was put under tribute. Thus the work of establishing a series of Assyr- ian vassal states from Cilicia across the Taurus as far as Mitylene was completed. The region of Malatia (Melitene, Khanigalbat) belonged to the Armenian highlands and was naturally the next to be overrun by a conquering army sent in that direction. It was assured to Assyria in the reigns of Shalmaneser I., Tiglath- pileser, and Ashur-natsir-pal, who conducted ex- peditions as far as Lake Van. Inasmuch as there were evident signs of a united, independent state springing up here in the North in Urartu, with its centre on Lake Van, Shalmaneser waged war on its kings. In 857 he had traversed the regions on the south of the Upper Euphrates, viz., Alzi, ^amani, Anzitene, and beyond the Arsanias those of the Sukhme and Dayaeni who had been subjugated by Shalmaneser I. and Tiglathpileser. From this point he penetrated Urartu and King Arame fled to the interior. Shalmaneser set up his image on Lake Van and then continued his march through the eastern passes into Gilzan and Khupushkia to Arbael. Fresh expeditions set out again in 850 and 845, and probably during the last he carved his inscription on the Subnat.^ In the meantime a change must have taken place in the ruling power in Armenia which had placed 1 Vid. p. 201. THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 225 on the throne the strong dynasty that had its seat in Thuruspa, on Lake Van, whence it founded the powerful kingdom of Urartu. In later times it was a source of much trouble to Assyria and disputed with her the sovereignty over Syria. A trace of the ambitious designs of these kings is probably to be sought in the revolt of Lallas of Malatia in the year 837. Four years later, in 833, an Assyrian army was despatched to the Arsanias apparently to retake Sukhmi and Dayaeni, which lay on its right bank. Sarduri I., the new king of Urartu, was, therefore, apparently advancing. In 829 another expedition set out from the other side through the passes of Gilzan and Khupushkia. Mutsatsir, a state lying south of Lake Van, was plundered, and a part of Urartu was also spoiled. But no permanent results were effected here by the Assyrians- On the contrary, the strength of the new state continually grew, and from the time of Adad-nirari onward Assyria was more and more driven out of these regions. The kings of Urartu reached out toward Mesopotamia and Syria until under Tiglathpileser III. they were forced back to their highlands. While on the south and southeast the Zab formed the boundary under Ashur-natsir-pal, Shalmaneser advanced against the countries lying ' between the Urumia Sea and the valley of the Tigris. These had frequently before been under 226 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Assyrian supremacy, as the Lulumi, but now, as often happened in other cases, they had fallen under Babylonian influence. In 860 an expedition was made into the passes of Holvan, in 844 an- other into the land of Namri, Southwestern Media, and in 836 Shalmaneser marched against the princes which had been raised to rule there in Bit-Khamban. Thence the army moved northward toward Parsua to the east of the Urumia Sea. Median chiefs, which now first appear in the role of Assyrian history, brought their tribute and then the march continued southward to Klarkhar to the east of Holvan. Kirkhi and Khupushkia south of Lake Van and the Urumia Sea, which Ashur-natsir-pal had overrun, were again sub- jected. Man, which lay on the west shore of the TJrumia Sea, and Gilzan to the north of it were likewise scourged. Shalmaneser 's successes in Babylon have al- ready been discussed in the history of Babylonia. The close connection with Babylonia and the influ- ence which it exerted doubtless occasioned the revolt which arose toward the close of Shal- maneser 's reign. The agricultural class of Assyria must have suffered by the wars — Baby- lonia was the seat of the hierarchy : in this insur- rection these antitheses must have had their effect. Almost all of Assyria and her provinces, and first among them the former capital, Ashur, which had THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 227 greatly suffered by the change of residence, with- drew. The capital Kalkhi and the Mesopotamian royal seat, Harran, in which Shalmaneser had rebuilt the temple of the sun-god, were the only important cities which remained steadfast. Shal- maneser, as it appears, found refuge himself in North Babylonia which then belonged to him. The leader of the insurrection was Shalmaneser 's son, ASHUR-DANIN-PAL, 829-824, who held the throne for at least six years, and certainly bore the title "king of Ashur," as the old capital was in his possession. In 825 Shalmaneser died, and his son, SHAMSHI-ADAD, 825-812, although at first in possession of Mesopotamia only, and, therefore, only "king of the World," reconquered Assyria. The only inscription of his that we have brings us to his fourth expedition, which was directed against Babylonia. The first one was to the Nairi-Lands, and connected there- with he secured obeisance from the entire Assyr- ian kingdom from its northermost to its southern boundary and from its eastern line to the Eu- phrates. As yet there were no Assyrian prov- inces in Syria. The second of his expeditions was also toward the Nairi-Lands, and this time he passed through the region between Lake Van and 228 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA the Urumia Sea, and devastated also a part of Urartu, whose king, Ispuinis, the son of Sarduris I., Shamshi-Adad calls Ushpina. Thither the third expedition went also, and, advancing as far as Man, circled the Urumia Sea and reached Par- sua. Thence proceeding toward the southeast through Media it arrived probably at Holvan. Numerous Median districts are enumerated which he placed under tribute. In the stronghold Sibara, of the land of Gizilbunda, he set up a monolith statue^ of himself on which he inscribed an account of his victories in the Nairi-Lands. His fourth expedition was the one against Baby- lon and the narrative of it ends with his victory over Marduk-balatsu-iqbi. From the reign of Shamshi-Adad onward we have another document which is an invaluable guide for the later period. One fragment of it refers to the beginning and end of the reign of Shalmaneser II. This is the Eponym Canon, a limmu-Ust,^ with a brief statement of some impor- tant event or events, generally with an expedition of each year added. It is especially valuable for the period following Tiglathpileser III., of which we possess few inscriptions. We have short in- scriptions of ' other inscriptions have recently been discovered by the Ger- man expedition at Kalah Shergat, but they await pubUcation. One Contains extended information of the first two years of the king. ' Vid. p. 210. THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 229 ADAD-NIRARI III., 812-783, whicli give a brief general survey of his enter- prises, and those we can supplement with the aid of the Eponym Canon. In general the work undertaken was a continuation of the conquests of his predecessors or the restoration of dis- affected territories. It seems improbable that he made any important conquests. In the East he subjugated Ellipi, bordering on Elam, and Khar- khar and Araziash as far as Parsua, which are known to us from Shalmaneser's wars. Andia, on the northeast of Parsua, he conquered for the first time. Median chiefs were also compelled to pay tribute. Three expeditions were made to Khupuskia and the Nairi-Lands and two to Man. Urartu, however, continued to grow in power and he did not venture an attack upon her territory. In Syria, on the other hand, he won successes. In 806 and 805 he marched against Arpad and Azaz, and in 797 against the Syrian city Man- zuate. It was probably in connection with this that Mari of Damascus paid tribute — possibly the result of a change of rulers. Tyre, Sidon, and Israel are also named among the tributary states, and Edom and Philistia were added by him to the number. This gives evidence of a dominant Assyrian influence and a consequent loss of pres- tige and power by Damascus in Palestine. But 230 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA so long as she retained her independence she remained a bulwark of defence for the southern countries. Adad-nirari's relations to Babylonia have already been discussed under Babylonia. We are but meagerly informed as to the inner movements of Oriental states, especially where we draw our information from royal, that is, official reports. In these the king does everything, even when he is no more than a puppet in the hands of his officials. The insurrections show clearly enough that other forces as well as the will and wisdom of the ruler determine the popular life, and that occasionally they culminate in volcanic eruptions. Tukulti-Ninib I. and Shalmaneser II. illustrate this fact instructively. Besides the army, the leading role is played in the Orient by the priesthood, which often controls not only the minds of the people, but also a large part, often the largest part, of the landed prop- erty, and appears especially, in the role of the modern citizen, in trade and industry. Great movements from within whose deeper causes lead to social conflicts are, consequently, constantly bound up with similar ones in the priesthood. Every revolution receives a religious expression, for all thought and all law is religious ; every party fights for the law, that is, for the true and uncor- rupted will of the deity. The best known, and also the most instructive example up to the pres- THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 231 ent is the reform, or revolution, of AmenopMs IV./ which rested on the worship of the sun-god as the only form in which the deity was revealed, and which sought to establish accordingly a mono- theistic religion. Every inner movement must express itself in corresponding forms, and when we shall have gained a clearer view of the histori- cal development of ancient Oriental civilizations these facts will be everywhere discoverable. "We can now point to only one such case in Assyria during the reign of Adad-nirari. We have a remarkable inscription upon statues of the god Nebo. These statues and the inscriptions, strange to say, were not dedicated by the king, but by one of his governors, Bel-tartsi-ilu-ma,^ whose authority extended over many provinces. He presented them "for the life of the king." With the king he also mentions his spouse, Sani- muramat. Ever since this inscription was dis- covered efforts have been made to identify it with the legendary S emir amis. It may be that story has to do with a woman who played a leading part in a political revolution and, therefore, her name became adorned with legendary material — that is all that can be said of it. Of vastly more impor- tance is the fact that Bel-tartsi-ilu-ma, who acts •On the religious revolution of Amenophis (Ikhnaton) see Breas- ted's History of Egypt, Chap, xviii. — Craig. ' He was limmu in 798. One of his official seals is in our possession . 232 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA here the part of a major domus, plainly preaches in this text a religion quite different from the prevailing state religion, and a monotheistic one in the same sense as that of Amenophis IV. "Put thy trust in Nebo ; trust not in another God" is the "essential" truth with which he closes his inscrip- tion, just as the Protestant reformers declared their fundamental position: "The word of Grod endureth forever." ^ But this is a complete break with the old religion, and when Nebo is regarded as the only true manifestation of deity we appear to have a development of doctrine from the Assyr- ian point of view which corresponds to the theo- logical position reached in the West — in Palestine. As the reform of Amenophis IV. found its echo in Palestine — in Jerusalem and Tyre — so also in name at least, if not in effectiveness, did this one undertaken during the reign of Adad-nirari. Adad-nirari was the king who rescued Israel from her oppressor, Damascus,^ and whom Jonah found at Nineveh when he went there and found royal sjTupathy with his teaching.* We have no inscriptions of the following period and are consequently compelled to draw entirely 1 Following I. Peter 1,24 f., which quotes from Isa. 40, 7 f., where, however, "the word of our God" is not "the word of God" of the Reformation. — Craig. 2 Vid. 2 Ki. 13, 5. 5 This is not meant to confirm the historic character of the story of Jonah. — Craig. THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 233 from the Eponym Canon. The absence of in- scriptions is evidence in itself of a time of weak- ness, and this is confirmed by the few established facts. In general, it may be said that the next forty years were spent in maintaining that which had been won previously, and this effort was not always crowned with success. We shall see when we come to the rise of power under Tiglathpileser that much had been lost and had to be regained. This was particularly true of the regions that lay within the sphere of interest of the new kingdom of Urartu. When Assyria ceased to attack she was herself attacked. This was the case from now on in Armenia, whose kings extended their sway southward and deprived Assyria of the Nairi- Lands and her control in North Syria. The suc- cessor of Adad-nirari III., SHALMANESER III., 783-773, was principally engaged in defensive wars against Urartu. Six out of his ten expeditions were against this new and advancing power. On the East, in the lands along the Median frontier, less loss seems to have been sustained; but there the states were in the main semi-barbarian and defec- tively organized. Two expeditions were sent thither to the land of Namri, in 749 and 748, and one advanced against the Medes in 766. The next king was 234 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ASHUR-DAN III., 773-764. He marched several times into Syria, the first time against Damascus, and the second against lOiata- rikka to the north of it. Twice he advanced into Babylonia, in 771 and 767, where he sought to oppose the Chaldeans. The second half of his reign witnessed a weakening of his kingdom which compelled concentration of effort upon the mainte- nance of that which had been slowly accomplished in the tributary states. In 763 an insurrection broke out which, in the years that followed, was repeated in different quarters until by degrees a large part of the kingdom was involved. The Eponym Canon puts a division line before this year (the year which it tells us the eclipse of the sun occurred — a valuable notice for the deter- mination of the old chronology) as it does before the beginning of a new reign ; for, since the insur- rection took place in Ashur, a rival king must have been called forth. What the deeper under- lying cause may have been we are not informed, but it is not difficult to discover it, for the insurrec- tion originated in the old capital. When we con- sider that Tiglathpileser then chose Kalkhi again, and, on the other hand, that Sargon II. restored to Ashur its privileges, we may infer that it was connected with a movement of the injured priest- hood of Babylon who suffered by a removal of the THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 235 royal residence. The Eponym Canon does not name the king who was raised to the throne by the insurrection, but from various statements it is clear that he was recognized as king. He was ADAD-NIRARI IV., 763-755, whose filial relation to his predecessor did not necessarily prevent opposition to his father. He in turn experienced the same treatment from his son, who rebelled against him. According to the view of the Eponym Canon, which is that of the capital Ashur, the latter, it is true, is only a repression of the insurrection by ASHUR-NIRARI II., 754-746, who was clearly influenced by the ancient capital, for the first act of his reign was to make Ashur his residence. This means that the hierarchy triumphed over the army on which Assyria's strength rested. Therewith, the kingdom, in giv- ing up its only support, acted fatally for itself. Ashur-nirari ruled eight years, during which, with one exception, according to the Eponym Canon, he was "in the land," that is, there was no war. But from the same source we learn that in 746 there was an "insurrection in Kalkhi," and the following year Tiglathpileser III. as- cended the throne. We know from his inscrip- 236 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA tions that he resided in Kalkhi and that he was not of the royal line. It thus appears that he ascended the throne as the result of a military insurrection. Ashur-nirari II., who ruled in Ashur under the influence of the priests, was the last of his house.^ As in the case of his prede- cessors none of his inscriptions have been dis- covered. But we have a valuable document which presents an agreement made between him and Mati-il of Arpad (Arvad), wherein the latter acknowledges Assyrian sovereignty. It was prob- ably drawn up during the expedition to the West in 754. The wars of Tiglathpileser III. show how much value this agreement had. It is one of the numerous examples of prevailing conditions at this and other times in Western Asia, and is an instructive illustration of Palestinian conditions ten years later. 1 From sources not yet authentically published it seems, never- theless, that Tiglathpileser may have been the son of Adad-nirari IV. That would harmonize perfectly with the view of Assyria's internal politics presented above. CHAPTER VI THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM: ASSYRIA THE PARA- MOUNT POWER IN WESTERN ASIA A NEW period of Assyrian history begins with TIGLATHPILESER III., 745-728. With him there came an advance in power which made Assyria the ruling power of Western Asia. It was he who laid the foundations of Assyria's fame. This is the period when Assyria subjugated Damascus and Palestine. Thus she entered into the history of that little people whose literary remains were for so long the best known of antiquity, and which for two thousand years pre- served the name of Assyria while her own monu- mental records lay beneath the earth and no man knew what language she had spoken. Tiglathpileser's wars fall under three geo- graphical heads : viz., in Babylonia, the North, and Syria-Palestine with Damascus. His successes in Babylonia have already been described. In the North he had to fight against IJrartu, now vigor- ous grown. In the West tribute was withheld since the last war, 773, and, owing to the weakness of Assyria, Damascus had risen again to strength. After the Babylonian expedition during the 237 238 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA first year, 745, and one against Western Media in the second year, war broke out two years later, in 742, with Sarduris II. of Armenia. The latter had in the meantime gone forth to conquer with- out reserve. Melitene, Commagene (Kummukh), the northern part of Patin, and Gurgum, he sub- jugated and compelled their kings to pay tribute to him instead of to Assyria. Then he entered into an agreement with Mati-il of Agusi who resided in Arpad, the centre of his little kingdom. On the advance of Sarduri Mati-il joined forces with him, whether voluntarily, with the hope of winning advantages, or under compulsion, it mat- ters not — it is the old story of the small state ground between the upper and the nether mill- stones of the larger powers. According to the Eponym Chronicle Tiglathpileser appeared in 743 before Arpad, doubtless against Mati-il, when an Armenian army led by Sarduris fell upon Mesopotamia. Sarduris was worsted in the region of Kummukh and pursued to the "Bridge of the Euphrates, the boundary of his land," and thus an end was put to his inroads into Mesopo- tamia. Further measures against him had to be postponed. The following three years were spent in expeditions "against Arpad." Mati-il must, therefore, have offered an energetic resistance. After his fall the majority of the Syrian princes paid tribute, among them Kustaspi of Kum- THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 239 mukh, and Tarkhulara of Gurgum which, there- fore, seceded from Urartu, further Eezon of Damascus, Hiram of Tyre, the prince of Kue, and Pisiris of Carchemish. Assyria's rule in Syria was consequently restored during these three years and Urartu driven out. Only a part of Patin, Unqi (that is, the Amq) joined the capital city Kinalia, or Kunalua, in opposition for which its prince Tutammu lost his throne and this part of the land was made into an Assyrian province. In the following year, 739, Ulluba, one of the Nairi-Lands, was brought under Assyrian rule. This was, of course, a blow at Armenia, from which this region was taken. It was fortified so that it might be able to withstand her attacks and bore the name ''Fortress-land." It formed, therefore, a kind of military borderland, and the Assyrian precaution in constructing a line of forts shows what a dangerous enemy Urartu had be- come. Azriya'u,^ the prince of Ya'udi, bordering on Samal-Sendjirli revolted and his city, Kullani, was conquered. This event cast its shadow down to Israel and Judah, and Isaiah, the prophet, pointed to Calno as an example of warning.^ A number of North Phoenician districts — ^where Ashur-natsir-pal had founded his Assyrian colony, ' Formerly falsely identified with Azariah (Uzziah) of Judali. 2 Isa. 10, 9. 240 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Aribua, and which now belonged to Hamath — also joined Azriya'u and shared his fate. Out of these the Assyrian province Tsimirra, stretching from the Orontes to Gebal, was formed, but it did not include Gebal or Arvad which remained inde- pendent. This new Phcenician province, which was enlarged in 733, was given by Tiglathpileser to his son Shalmaneser as governor. Thus a part of the frontier lands of Damascus passed over to Assyria. Damascus itself as well as the other Syrian and Phcenician states, Kummukh, Carche- mish, Sam'al, and Gurgum in the Amq,^ Hamath, Kue, Gebal, Tyre, and Menahem of Israel paid tribute, and from the biblical account it appears that the latter paid only when part of his territory had been taken. So, too, the larger circle of states which once had been subject to Shalmaneser again paid tribute : Melitene, Kasku, Tabal, and princi- palities in Cappadocia and Cilicia. Now that the Assyrian king was feudal lord of Damascus he received presents also from the Arab king, Zabibi. Expeditions were sent against Media and Nairi in 737 and 736, the principal object being to break the power of Urartu in these quarters. The following year the war was carried into the enemy's country; Urartu was traversed and Tig- lathpileser besieged the citadel Thuruspa (Van), but in vain. He was obliged to withdraw after » P. 239. THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 241 setting up his royal image before the eyes of the besieged. He, however, incorporated the southern part of Urartu with the province of Nairi, and this was a serious blow to the kingdom. The border provinces were also fortified and the possi- bilities of advance were thereby lessened. This put an end to the rule of Urartu over Syria and Nairi, but her plans for conquest were not aban- doned until her strength was broken by Sargon and the Gimmirai^ (Cimmerians) appeared a threatening foe on the western side. Up to this time Damascus had paid its tribute ; but nothing was so certain as the uncertainty of the tributary states to Assyria. On the one hand the demands were so high that the tribute could only be wrung out of them by feudal princes ; on the other, this state of affairs was a constant temptation to revolt whenever there was the slightest hope. Moreover, tributary states may have been provoked to revolt in order to furnish an excuse for incorporating them as provinces : compare the dealings of the Romans with their Socii. In 734 an expedition was made to Philistia and Askalon was put under Assyrian control. It was evident that all Palestine must yield with Damascus, But soon afterward Damascus broke loose. Eezon and his vassal, Pekah of Israel, had 'Gen. X., 2, "Gomer." The word survives also in the modem Crimea. — Craig. 242 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA shut up Ahaz of Judah in Jerusalem in order to compel Mm to join with them and Tyre in a coali- tion against Assyria in which help was expected from Egypt. Ahaz appealed for help, and in 733 Tiglathpileser's troops stood before Damascus.^ On the approach of the Assyrian army the pro- Assyrian party of Israel revolted and deposed Pekah and appointed Hosea, their own leader, king in his stead. This well-timed revolt robbed Tiglathpileser of a pretext for interference. A brief respite of ten to twelve years was thus pur- chased, but Israel 's fate was only postponed. As previously, Damascus offered successful resist- ance ; but at last, in the year 732, she became an Assyrian province. Israel, already weakened by loss of territory, stood now in immediate contact with an Assyrian province: the state which had before dominated her politically and was her guide in cultural development was now under the rule of an Assyrian governor ! Tyre also, the rich mercantile city, which could most easily pay its tribute, made her peace on the approach of the Assyrian army. The next years were devoted to the conquest of Babylonia and Babylon.^ For two years Tiglath- pileser ruled as king of Babylon, and in 728 he died. He was succeeded by his son, 1 Cf. 2 Ki. xvi., 5 ff., Isa. vii., 1 £f. 2 P. 114 f. THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 243 SHALMANESER IV., 727-722. His reign is only an appendage to that of his father's, whose policy he appears to have closely followed. None of his own inscriptions have come down to ns. During his reign Samaria was again forced to withhold her tribute, but the help that was hoped for from Egypt failed, and, after a siege of three years, the city was taken and an Assyrian governor appointed. Thus the Assyrian boundary was extended southward almost to Jeru- salem. Before the fall of Samaria Shalmaneser died, and the conquest is, therefore, attributed to SARGON II., 722-705. This Sargon,^ like Tiglathpileser, was the founder of a new dynasty, and he became king as the result of a reaction against the same movement which placed Tiglathpileser upon the throne. His state- ments- about his predecessor's acts which he nulli- fied reveal the nature of this inner movement that had already manifested itself in the insurrections of Ashur-danin-apli and of the year 763. Tiglathpileser, therefore, strove to limit the powerful influence of the priesthood and the larger cities' privileges which were also of priestly origin. They were in possession of un- limited rights and exempt from almost every bur- ' His name appears in the O. T. only in the brief reference to the conquest of Ashdod. Isa. 20, 1. — Craig. 244 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA den. Wlieii we consider that the largest part of the landed property also belonged to them it is clear the income of the state grew constantly less, and clear also why the Assyrian kingdom became at the last so powerless — it was priest-ridden. This also determined the attitude of Assyrian kings toward Babylon. Tiglathpileser, Shal- maneser, Sennacherib, Ashnrbanipal, all took energetic measures against her, Sargon and Esar- haddon favored her. It was here that the free- dom enjoyed by the priesthood and the cities and that induced the national weakness was most insisted upon. Tiglathpileser and Shalmaneser sought to put an end to the system, and in their effort must have looked to the agricultural class, such as still existed, for support, not because the kings were particularly interested in the plight of the "poor man," but rather with a view to con- ditions that would yield more taxes and provide subjects more fit for service. They were aware, however, that a kingdom which depended upon the cities and the hierarchy could maintain itself only • so long as it had advantages to offer them. From this point on we are able to follow the active opposition of the two contending parties in Assyria — the violent changes of rulers reveal it clearly. It is self-evident that a drawing together of the privileged cities and temples resulted in no good to the country population, THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 245 whicli at best only furnished the masses for a movement. In reality, indeed, it turned on the antithesis between land and city, but the land was actually represented by the nobility who partly controlled the army. Consequently, Tiglath- pileser and Shalmaneser were under their influ- ence. Sargon, who was raised to the throne by the opposite party, favored the cities and temples and restored to them their former privileges. Senna- cherib again represented the nobility and army as is clear even in his conduct toward Babylon. He was murdered, and with Esarhaddon the Babylonian hierarchical party triumphed. Then when he tried to secure the throne for his son Shamash-shum-ukin, who was similarly disposed, an insurrection broke out, and, by the enthrone- ment of Ashurbanipal, the Assyrian nobility was victorious. These are the two political factors which from now on determine Assyrian history. When Tiglathpileser ascended the throne a well defined and conscious opposition between them was developed. Thiis in the year 722 when Shalmaneser IV. died Sargon, who was not of royal descent, was sud- denly placed upon the throne, but despite his descent he became the head of the royal house under which Assyria witnessed the climax of its power and its rapid fall. His reign, which in internal affairs was the opposite of Tiglath- 246 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA pileser's, was externally a continuation and com- pletion of that which had been begun by the latter. That he effected it with other means than his predecessor we have already seen. From now on the Assyrian army was composed of mercenary troops, gathered from all lands and provinces, wholly at command of the king so long as he was able to provide them with money and plunder, but instantly recalcitrant when these failed. Henceforth it was the "royal" army that held the Orient in check. Assyrian rule thereby devolved upon a government (according to Oriental cus- tom — plundering) by the nobility and hierarchy. An Assyrian people, to whom Shalmaneser I. and Ashur-natsir-pal had assigned land in conquered provinces, no longer existed. Now when the king wishes to settle a conquered region with new set- tlers he must resort to an exchange of peoples from different quarters of his kingdom. The agricultural class in Assyria was destroyed : there remained only large estates of the nobility or the temple cultivated by slaves or homeless hirelings. The wars of Sargon are, in the main, only a continuation of his predecessors on the old battle- grounds — in Babylonia with the Chaldeans and Elam, in the North with Urartu, and in Palestine where he sought further conquests. His successes in Babylonia we know already (p. 117). In Palestine, as we have just mentioned, THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 247 Samaria was incorporated and "the ten tribes carried into captivity, ' ' a fact which gives impor- tance to the name of Sargon for the student of the Old Testament, though it was clearly the result of the siege by Shalmaneser IV. Up to this time Hamath, north of Damascus in Syria, had warded off the blow by prompt payment of tribute, but it had evidence in 738 of Assyria's altruism in the way of "benevolent assimilation" when the rebellious Hamathite cities were taken and incorporated in the province of Tsimirra. Hamath 's hopes must have been quickened by a change of rulers in Assyria, and so in 720 we find the subservient king, Eni-il, dethroned and a **' rustic" Ya-u-bi-'di in his stead in open opposi- tion to Assyria. Hanno of Gaza, who was com- pelled to submit to Tiglathpileser, united with him. Evidently both of them had put their trust in Egypt.^ They were also supported by the peoples of North Arabia whose marts were in Gaza, and who consequently paid tribute to Assyria. The newly established provinces of Arpad, Tsimmirra, Damascus, and Samaria also joined them, incited thereto by Ya-u-bi-'di. Thus the greater part of Syria and Palestine tried to rid itself of Assyr- ian dominion or tribute. But the effort of the 'A few years later the Assyrian commander of Sennacherib's army, when he parleyed with Hezekiah's officers at Jerusalem, aptly described Egypt as ''a staff of a broken reed, which if leaned upon will pierce the hand." Isa. 36, 6. — Crai^. 248 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA allies failed to bring about concerted action — a common defect of petty states in sucli undertak- ings. Hamath was conquered and placed under tribute and Ya-u-bi-'di flayed. Hanno, who with the help of an Arabian force was trying to conquer Gaza, not as yet in his hands apparently, was repulsed at Eaphia, on the southern border of Gaza's territory. The rebellious provinces were easily subdued. Peace reigned again in Syria and Palestine. Sargon was now at liberty to confront his third enemy, Urartu. There Rusas I. had again sought to bring North Syria and the bordering Median states on the east under his influence, and appar- ently his project found approval. Sargon saw the immediate necessity, as Tiglathpileser did during his reign, of subjecting this faithless vassal. In 719 two cities of Man (on the west coast of the Urumia Sea), whose king held to Assyria despite the influence of Urartu, were overrun and plun- dered because they had gone over to the Indo- Germanic tribe, Zigirtu, which favored Urartu. The same fate befell a couple more cities that revolted to Urartu. In 718 Kiakki, one of the princes of Tabal in Cappadocia, who had thrown off the Assyrian yoke, was carried captive with 7,350 of his troops and his capital delivered over to a neighboring loyalist, Matti of Atun.^ The in- lOr Tuimu Keilinschrijtliche Bibliothek, II., 56, 1. THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 249 habitants of these regions were separated in the main by the Taurus, from Syria the particular field of interest to Assyria. They naturally be- longed to Asia Minor. They entered their terri- tory during the last Hittite immigration which, as we have seen, occurred in the time of Tiglath- pileser I. The relation they occupied to the old Hittite kingdom on the Halys and to the west of it corresponded to that sustained to Assyria by the petty Syrian states which she was forced to subdue in the period following Shalmaneser II. One of these peoples which meets us most fre- quently at that time is the Muski. They had taken possession of the land of the Khatti, the old Kheta kingdom, and there played a part similar to that played, as we have often seen, in the coun- tries of the Euphrates by the different immi- grants, the Kassites, Chaldeans, etc. Just as the Old Testament spoke of the Babylon of Nebuchad- rezzar and its rulers as Chaldean, so the people who occupied the seat of the old kingdom of Khatti could be designated Muski. After the eleventh century new iramigrations arrived in these regions; and after Sargon's time, in the seventh century, we witness the intrusion of the Indo-Germanic tribes. A new population arose, or the old was greatly modified by the new, and thus a new name might be given to the regions as happened in the case of the Muski. 250 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA A glance at the historical development of these peoples and states readily explains why a well known figure of classical tradition conies before ns under a different name in the inscriptions of Sargon. The ruler in Asia Minor who attempted to oppose the advance of Sargon in the direction of Armenia and in Cilicia (Kue), and who repre- sented the strongest of the powers of Asia Minor is Mita of Muski, that is, Midas, king of Phrygia, with whom the earliest G-reek traditions of Asia Minor begin. In his opposition to Sargon he shows that the mantle of the old kings of Khatti had fallen upon him. Karchemish, that had paid tribute from the time of Ashur-natsir-pal, fell in 717. Assyrian oppressions had exhausted the patience even of this wealthy city and goaded her to hopeless war. Here again the consciousness of the old historical connection appears to view. Karchemish had always been the advance post of the Khatti power in Syria; her kings were sometimes briefly called kings of Khatti. Now again she turned for support against Assyria to the master of the old Khatti kingdom on the Halys. But the Asiatic power of Muski-Phrygia was no match for Assyria. The protection of Midas (Mita) availed no more in bringing help to the vassal against Assyria than Egypt, or earlier Mutsri, did in warding off Sennacherib from Judah. Pisiris THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 251 was tlie last king of Karchemish — and the last remnant of the Khatti kingdom in Syria now became an Assyrian province. In 716 and 715 war was again waged in the east of Urartu where Eusas, having abandoned Syria and turned eastward, had attempted in the meantime to take Man by force. By exciting cer- tain tribes to insurrection and regicide he suc- ceeded in placing on the throne Ullusunu, son of the murdered king. But before the party friendly to Urartu had time to establish themselves Sargon appeared with his troops and forced their ap- pointee to do homage. His little kingdom had been overrun, fifty-five of Eusas ' walled cities had been burned, and he had sought refuge in the moun- tains ; but a timely supplication to the conqueror saved him his life and with it his partly ruined kingdom and capital. In his palace Sargon set up his stele with his royal image and ' ' the might of Ashur" engraved thereon as a reminder for future days. The prince of Nairi and other chiefs of these regions followed Ullusunu 's example. In 714 the war was continued in Urartu. Pro- ceeding from Man through Mutsatsir, whose con- quest he represented in the sculptures of his palace, Sargon advanced toward Lake Van, devas- tating the land. Eusas, when he heard of the havoc wrought in Mutsatsir and of the capture of the prince's family and gods, ended his life with 252 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA his girdle dagger, although Sargon failed to effect a complete conquest of his land. From now on, however, the power of Urartu as a rival of Assyria was broken. It was now compelled to con- tend for its existence with the Kimmerians, the new enemy already mentioned, upon its northern border. But, while Assyria had disposed of an enemy she had thereby weakened the natural bar- rier against the imminent danger of being overrun by the Indo-Germanic hordes. She had already come into conflict with the van of this movement in the above mentioned Zigirtu. The Assyrian army officers in the border provinces of the North were thereafter compelled to keep a close watch upon the struggles between Urartu and the Kimmerians and other related tribes. In the reign of Esarhaddon, the latter, as we shall see, have already begun to threaten Assyrian territory. Of the earlier land of Patin many districts were already incorporated in Syria. Under Sargon the remainder, vis., Gurgum, with its capital Mar- qasi (Mar 'ash), was included. Kue and other Cappadocian districts, among which was Kam- manu, which represented the earlier Mutsri in Anti-Taurus, Melitene, and Kummukh, were re- duced to Assyrian provinces as the result of futile attempts to win their liberty. Therewith the limit of Assyria's extension on her northwest THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 253 border was attained. Near the close of Sargon's reign the governor of Kue attempted to push across beyond the Taurus to curb the predatory desires of Mita of Muski, who was trying to ad- vance there as well as against the northwest of Assyria. When the occupation of Babylon was effected by Sargon he received presents from seven Greek "kings." This is the earliest attested contact with "lonians." The princes who offered their homage were on the west of the island, and they sought assistance from Assyria in their efforts to dislodge the Phoenicians of Tyre from the East. Here again, as in the case of Midas, we see con- nections with Greek history long before there is any connected Greek tradition. Ashdod alone, in Southern Palestine, relying upon Arab support, refused her tribute. It is noteworthy because of the mention of Ashdod 's capture in Isaiah XX., 1.^ This revolt in the im- mediate neighborhood must have been followed with hope and anxiety in Judah. According to Sargon Judah was also plotting with Moab and Ammon against Assyria, though it never came to open revolt, when an Assyrian army fell upon Ashdod and there founded an Assyrian colony. In the East Elam was unable to accomplish any- • The gods of Ashdod most of the inhabitants, and the treasures of the city were carried off to Assyria. 254 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA thing in Babylonia after the expulsion of Mero- dach-baladan. But the opposition of the two rivals found expression over a struggle for the throne of the borderland EUipi. There two brothers contested each other's claims, the one seeking the support of Elam, the other that of Sargon. Mbe, the protege of Elam, won at first in the conflict over his brother Ispabara, but the latter finally triumphed with the help of Sargon. Near the end of Sargon 's rule the great palace which he had been building at Khorsabad, north of Nineveh, at the foot of the mountain, was com- pleted, and in 707 it was entered with all the pomp of religion and magnificence of state. The capital was thus removed from Kalkhi, although Sargon ascended the throne by the aid of the party which there found its chief support. But, on account of its location, it was no longer suitable as the seat of government. Therefore the new capital was founded, to which Sargon gave the name Dur- SharruMn ( Sargon 's City), following the example of his somewhat legendary ideal whose name he assumed at the time of his accession. "Sargon II." was the name given him by his faithful scribes who were prepared to furnish scientific evidence — always on hand for the successful con- queror — that he, by divine decree and the natural course of events, was the one ordained to intro- THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 255 duce a new era and fulfil the expectations of the nation.^ The inscriptions and the sculptures of the pal- ace of Dur-Sharrukin, the first of all to be exca- vated,^ are the main source for the history of his reign. He died in 705. The details of his death are wanting. According to a statement of Senna- cherib he met with a violent death and ' ' was not buried in his house," that is, he did not receive a customary burial. The only explanation of this is that he fell in tattle with barbarians as Cyrus did. These were to be found almost alone on the northern border of Assyria in the Indo-Germanic tribes, the Kimmerians, and "Scythians." We naturally think first of the Scythians. The exult- ant psean of Isa. 14, 4-21, was composed, in all probability, on the occasion of the unexpected death of Sargon and afterward applied to a king of Babylon. The hopes which it aimed to arouse were not wanting: Palestine and Phoenicia at- tempted a widespread revolt. SENNACHERIB, 704-681. Sennacherib was at first engaged in Babylonia, and his second expedition was directed toward the Zagros, where he chastised the Kashshu, a 'Apocalyptic calculations, such as are met with in the Book of Daniel, fonn one of the persistent factors in pre-Christian his- toriography. ' By Botta, 1842-45. 256 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA remnant of the old Kassites, and also the Yasu- bigalli. Then, in 701, he turned toward Palestine. Here the moving spirits in the insurrection were Lull of Tyre, and Hezekiah of Judah. Luli was "king of the Sidonians. ' ' He possessed Tyre and Sidon and a territory that reached from the south of Beirut to Phihstia. Moreover, the eastern part of Cyprus was his with the most important city, Kition, or Carthage. We have already seen^ the western part was held by the "lonians" and friendly to Assyria because of its opposition to the Phoenicians. Hope of help from Mero- dach-baladan was also entertained, but he was quickly driven off. Promises had come like- wise from the Arab princes, and later on Arabian auxiliaries arrived. That Hezekiah was the leader of the insurrection is clear from the fact that the party opposed to Assyria in Ekron delivered into his hands Padi, its king, who favored Assyria. This was the development of events between 705 and 702. When in 701 Sennacherib set out and marched along the coast of Phoenicia, leaving behind a rock- hewn image of himself on the Nahr-el-Kelh, it was again evident that each power expected the others to destroy the much feared tyrant — concerted action was wanting. The Phoenician cities, Arvad and Gebal, the southern kingdoms, those of • P. 253. THE NEW ASSYRIAN KINGDOM 257 Philistia, and Judah's neighbors, Ammon, Moab and Edom paid tribute. Ltili abandoned Sidon and fled to Cyprus where he soon afterward died. Tyre alone resisted and held out against the siege of Sennacherib. In Sidon a new king, Ithobal, was appointed, thus rending the "kingdom of Sidon" in twain. He then advanced southward against Judah, where Hezekiah held out, trusting to the help coming from Arabia. He conquered Ekron, beat the relief army made up of Arab troops belonging to the princes of Mutsri and the king of Melukha, and gradually reduced 46 fortified cities. He then besieged the capital on all sides. The defenders held out, trusting that disturbances would break out in Babylon, and, in fact, Senna- cherib was compelled to withdraw without the surrender of Jerusalem. Judah 's independence — for the present — was saved. Hezekiah had, it is true, lost the greater part of his territory, for the conquered cities were apportioned to his neigh- bors, and he made haste to regain them. After the destruction of Babylon in 689, Senna- cherib was again free to act in the West. Mean- time some minor wars were waged in Cappadocia (Khilakku), and in Kammanu, the province founded by Sargon. Attempts of the "lonians" to land in Cilicia were also frustrated. No more great conquests were made here and the territorial limits were not enlarged by the erection of new 258 BABYLONIA AND ASSYEIA provinces. In 701 Tyre had successfully defended herself against siege and maintained her inde- pendence. The Arabs who came to the help of Hezekiah were repulsed, but Sennacherib was unable to mete out chastisement upon them. It appears as if he now undertook an expedition into Northwestern Arabia (Melukha) and Egypt. Jerusalem also anticipated attack, but fortune was again favorable. The Assyrian army did not even touch the land. Possibly on the march to Egypt it may have been overtaken in Arabia by plague or have succumbed to the unfavorable climate. Sennacherib was compelled with the loss of his army to return to Nineveh. There the fate of so many Oriental kings overtook him ; in an insurrection he was put to death by one of his sons. CHAPTEE VII THE DECLINE Sennacheeib 's reign was nowhere successful. He made an energetic attempt to solve the Baby- lonian problem, and, apparently, not without suc- cess. But even in Babylonia he got as many blows from Elam as he gave. In 694, while his army was plundering Elam, the Elamites laid waste Northern Babylonia and took captive his son, Ashur-nadin-shum. Compared with Tiglath- pileser and Sargon he failed in the West, being powerless to take either Tyre or Jerusalem. Neither in the East toward Media, nor in the West in Asia Minor, where his predecessors had made important conquests, did he succeed in making any noteworthy additions to the provincial terri- tory. When we look to the North we discover no evidences that he made any effort to check the threatened danger from that quarter, where, both in Urartu and Man, the Indo-Germanic tribes were constantly spreading. His failures explain his end. He owed his ascent to the throne to the military party, and, when he lost his army, he fell a victim of the rival faction, the "Babylonian." Within the latter 259 260 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA there must, nevertheless, have been different ten- dencies. The actual and natural leader was clearly ESARHADDON, 680-669, under whose administrative authority Babylonia was at the time. But one of his brothers^ must have attempted to anticipate Esarhaddon's acces- sion to the throne of Assyria, and it was, doubt- less, he who instigated the insurrection in which Sennacherib was murdered while "he was wor- shipping in the house of Nisroch, his god."^ Esarhaddon advanced against his foe and de- feated the insurrectionists in Melitene, whither they had fled in hope of help from Armenia, the implacable enemy of Assyria. Therewith, Esar- haddon became king of Assyria and Babylonia. In internal affairs Esarhaddon's policy was opposed to that of his predecessors, his most abid- ing work being the rebuilding of Babylon.^ The natural results followed: Babylonian culture revived, and the dominion over Western Asia was assured. For Assyria herself, the master of the • The Babylonian Chronicle and Berossus speak of only one son of Sennacherib as the murderer. The Old Testament gives the names of Adrammelech and Sharezer, the result, probably, of a corrupt text. This Sharezer may be the same as Shar-etir-(mati)- ashur, Shar kishshdti shar matdti to whom the letter, of which we have a fragment, was addressed containing a report of affairs in Northern Mesopotamia and mentioning the city Bit-Zamani. Vid. Winckler, Altor. Forsch. II. s. 2 Cf. II. Kings, 19, 37; Isa. 37, 38. 3 Cf. p. 122 f . THE DECLINE 261 hour, it proved fatal. In other respects Esarhad- don appeals to us as one of the most sympathetic figures in Assyrian history. He showed unwonted clemency to political offenders. Above all, his court must have been the centre of literary activi- ties which evidently drew their inspiration from the monarch whose inclinations were strongly Babylonian. Ashurbanipal, his son, boasts of the literary education he received and to it we owe the priceless collection of his library. Apart from the useless conquest of Egypt the Assyrian kingdom was not materially enlarged under Esarhaddon, as it had not been under his father, and was not later. His military under- takings resulted in general only in the mainte- nance and defence of the conquered territory. This, it is true, is in noteworthy contradiction to the idea, due to the influence of old Babylonian traditions, of a Babylonian world-power realized by him. At the very beginning of his reign, as the result of the expeditions against Arabia by Senna- cherib, Esarhaddon proclaims himself master of a territory which corresponds to that of Naram- Sin. Even the old Babylonian designations are used in order to make his time appear as a renais- sance of that age of Babylonia's highest achieve- ments — ".king of Suri (Mesopotamia and Western Asia Minor), Gutium, Amurru, Khatti-land, king of the kings of Dilmun, Magan and Melukha." 262 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA These are the titles lie assumes even prior to his expeditions against Arabia and the one connected therewith in which Egypt was conquered. His rule was to re-establish the old Babylonian world- power and Babylon was to be the capital. At- tempts at revolt by the Chaldeans were not wanting in Babylonia, but they never resulted in the recognition of a prince. In the "Sea-Land," Nabu-zer-kitti-lishir, a grandson of Merodach- baladan's, attempted the conquest of South Baby- lonia, advancing as far as Ur, but was compelled by an Assyrian army to flee to Elam. There, contrary to precedent, instead of meeting with a friendly reception, he was put to death. His brother, Na'id-Marduk, concluded that refuge in Elam was more dangerous than to be in the den of the lion, and, returning to Nineveh, received both pardon and the premiership of the Sea-Land. The conditions that resulted from the destruc- tion of Babylon and the character of the Chal- deans are alike illustrated by the treatment of Bit-Dakuri. This tribe had quickly taken posses- sion of the exposed territory of Babylon and that of the neighboring Borsippa. The restoration of Babylon made it necessary to deprive them by force of their unlawfully seized possessions. Their "king," Shamash-ibni, was deposed, the lands returned, and Nabusallim of another family was appointed to rule. At a later period, under THE DECLINE 263 Sliamasli-slnim-ukin, he appears again, in a trans- action relating to the property and legal rights of certain towns in the territory of Bit-Dakuri. Khumba-khaldash of Elam, as we have seen, offered no refuge to the grandson of Merodach- baladan. But, in the year 674, he wrought serious havoc in Northern Babylonia, which he plundered as far as Sippar. Esarhaddon was no more able than Sargon and Sennacherib to carry the war into the inaccessible territory of this dangerous enemy. On the contrary, he limited his efforts to secur- ing the obedience of the Gamhuli, on the Elamite border at the mouth of the Tigris, whose chief, Shapi-Bel, he intrusted with the protection of the boundary after he had strengthened his strong- hold for that purpose. In this he followed an age- long policy of Oriental states. With the successor of Khumba-khaldash, his brother Urtaki, the rela- tions with Esarhaddon became more friendly. The gods which had been carried off from Sippar in the spring he sent back and received aid in return from Esarhaddon in view of a famine that had in the meantime broken out in Elam. The famine made for friendship.^ In the West Tyre had maintained her resistance from 701 on; and, moreover, from about 694 she 'The Elamites doubtless attributed their ill-fortune to the wrath of the gods who were avenging themselves upon their enemies and captors, just as the Philistines attributed the "tumours'' to the ark of the God of Israel. Vid. I. Sam., 5, 1 ti.— Craig. 264 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA was backed by Egypt under the ambitious KusMte, Tabarqu. Sidon, too, that was separated from Tyre by Sennacherib, revolted in 678 under the new king, Abd-milkot, Ithobal 's successor. She was conquered and the old city that was situated, like Tyre and Arvad, upon an island was destroyed with the national sanctuary of all the "Sido- nians." A new city was built upon the mainland, which the conqueror named Kar-Esarhaddon and an Assyrian governor was stationed within it. Sidon thereafter remained a province and, proba- bly, was not ruled by her own kings until the Per- sian period. EsarJiaddon-hurg, which probably bore the name of Sidon also, formed the nucleus of the later city. A Ciliciaa prince, Sanduarri of Kundi^ and Sizu, were in alliance with Abd-milkot. After three years' opposition their citadels fell before the Assyrians, and the heads of Sanduarri and Sizu were carried to Nineveh almost at the same time as that of Abd-milkot. The resistance of Tyre was more stubbornly maintained. The "island" Sidon must have lain close to land, but the island Tyre offered greater difficulty to the besieger, and was first taken by Alexander by means of his famous dam which thereafter united it with the mainland. On his way to Egypt Esarhaddon attempted the reduc- ' Perhaps the old name of the stronghold Kylnda, the later An- chiale; Sizu the Sts of Islamitic time. THE DECLINE 265 tion of Tyre, and besieged it on the land side by taking possession of Usu, that lay close by, and cutting off the islanders' access to the water by the erection of earthworks. But the island being open to the sea held out, until the news arrived from Egypt in 670 that Taharqu was defeated. Ba'al, the king, then concluded that further resist- ance would be fruitless and submitted to tribute, accepting, at the same time, the condition usually imposed, namely, that the territorial status quo should remain unchanged. In other words, he was to hold the island-city, Tyre, while the territory on the mainland that had been seized by the Assyrians was made into an Assyrian province. In the same year, 670, the monolith of Esar- haddon which represents Taharqu and Ba'al kneeling as captives at his feet was erected at Senjirli, in Northern Syria. The royal images had been sculptured and all that remained to do was to add the inscription. Suddenly, however, Taharqu returned to Egypt, and Ba'al, who had nothing more to lose, again revolted. It is better, therefore, to ignore the close of the inscription, which goes on to tell of Ba^'al's subjection.^ ^ The correctness of this view cannot yet be determined, inasmuch as we are not sufficiently informed of the events connected with Esarhaddon's first attack on Egypt in 674. The sculptures on the obverse may refer to the results of that expedition while the inscrip- tion may relate to the second. Another account relating to the year 674 reports the capture of the "king of Melukha." Is it possible that Taharqu is meant, or some Arabian prince? It would 266 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA When, however, in 668 Taharqu was driven back the second time, and Tyre had endured the siege five years, from 673 to 678, probably without in- terruption, Ba'al again submitted. Tyre, since she was not conquered, kept her independence though reduced to the island. But her possessions on the mainland remained under Assyrian control. The possession of all the trading towns on the Syrian coast, and especially of Gaza, the terminus of the caravan road, as well as of Edom, through which this road passed, connecting Syria and Yemen, brought Assyria into close touch with the Arab tribes who conducted the overland trade. They had previously offered their homage to Tig- lathpileser and Sargon. Sennacherib afterward attempted the subjugation of the Arabs of the steppes. On one expedition which ended in the destruction of his army^ he reduced the "king- dom" of Aribi, took its capital and deported its queen and gods to Assyria. The latter were returned by Esarhaddon after he had bound the land by an oath of fealty. His army further went on exploiting expeditions, which are recounted with certain embellishments, far into West Arabia (Melukha) as well as toward the East, into Yemama. Probably they penetrated farther into seem, moreover, that South Arabia was then under Kushite rule, so that Esarhaddon and Taharqu may have contended for suprem- acy there. '■ Vid. p. 258. THE DECLINE 267 the interior of Arabia than any other armies except possibly those of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin in their conquests in Magan and Melukha. The murmurs of discontent were naturally al- ways to be heard on the borders of Cilicia and Cappadocia. Esarhaddon tells of an excursion he made into the region of Du'a, in the Taurus range adjoining Tabal. Melid (that is, Malatia) was conquered by Mukallu, who was possibly a chief of Tabal, or of some related tribe, and he with Ishkallu of Tabal threatened the Assyrian possessions. But concerning this the scribes of Esarhaddon remained silent. We know of it only from the questions addressed to the oracle of Shamash, the sun-god, questions which show that Assyrian possessions in Asia Minor were on the wane. What contributed to this change in the former Khatti-land we know not. The Kim- merians no doubt even then participated in the disturbances. The death of Midas of Phrygia is attributed to them. From the same oracles we are best informed as to the Indo-Germanic movements in Armenia. The governors of the border provinces no longer report defeats suffered by Urartu at the hands of the Kimmerians as they did in the time of Sennacherib. Now the oracle of the sun-god is anxiously asked whether the Kimmerians, Sa- parda, Ashkuza, Modes, who are devastating the 268 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA neighboring regions, will spare the Assyrian provinces; or, whether the Assyrian troops will succeed in relieving besieged places, or in retaking others that have been lost. The triumphant notes of Sargon's reports are no longer heard. Though Esarhaddon tells of victories over Kimmerians and Ashkuza he chronicles no permanent results. The conclusion is justified that, at the best, these victories were confined to outposts, if, indeed, they were not merely successful rear-guard actions. On the whole the decline of Assyrian power in this quarter is evident. A stage is reached where Assyrians and barbarians begin to meet on equal footing. In view of the danger which threatened from the Kimmerians, Esarhaddon sought and found an ally in the Ashkuza, to whose king, Bar- tatua, he gave his daughter in marriage. This same tribe, as we shall see, was in alliance with Assyria in her last days. The expeditions in the direction of Media were also ineffectual. There Indo-Germanic activity witnessed an increase after the disappearance of Namri and Parsua. It was certainly not difficult for a trained Assyrian army to annihilate, here and there, individual hordes and districts and bring back their captives and plunder. But the expeditions to the "Salt deserts," on the south- east of the Caspian Sea, and as far as Demavend, secured nothing of permanence. Fresh tribes THE DECLINE 269 immediately came to the front, and when one wave of the rising flood had spent itself it was quickly succeeded by another. The doom of the ancient civilization of the Orient, despite all the boasted victories, was here irresistibly sealed. It is, how- ever, no reflection upon the Assyrian king that he failed to see the greatness of the danger and acquire new resources by the conquest of other lands. One success he won which none of his pre- decessors had achieved — and the question whether it was achieved by a Babylonian monarch prior to the year 2000 remains to be answered by new discoveries — he conquered Egypt. In doing so he but followed the dictates of necessity. Conquest was imperative. Assyria's mercenary army, whose spears were still her only support, needed both employment and booty. Considerations of state were, however, not wholly wanting. Egypt as well as the countries of the Euphrates looked toward Palestine. If the use of the havens on the Mediterranean were necessary to the latter Palestine, nevertheless, lay contiguous to Egypt and was richer in promise in case she desired to expand. The history of these lands, accordingly, as far as we know it, shows Egypt either in pos- session of Palestine or struggling to regain it. In every revolt against Assyria Egypt was in- volved, though the help she promised was rarely given, *'The broken reed that pierced the hand 270 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of him who leaned thereon" is the descriptive phrase Isaiah coined with reference to Egypt and her false promises of assistance. The uninter- rupted disturbances in Palestine counselled a repression of the fomenter of discord. Senna- cherib had attempted that on his last expedition when he lost his army. Esarhaddon took up the task the more eagerly as the Ethiopian, Taharqu, against whom Senna- cherib's expedition was directed, had reunited Egypt and was more ambitious of conquest than the last of the Pharaohs. We have already seen that he participated in the revolt of Tyre in 673. In that year, according to the Babylonian Chroni- cle, the Assyrians were defeated in Egypt. The first attempt, therefore, to carry the war into the enemy's country was repelled. But in 671 a fresh army invaded Egypt and this time Taharqu was unable to resist. From Ishupri, where the first battle was fought, to Memphis, the Assyrian army advanced irresistibly in fifteen days. On five occasions Taharqu attempted to stay their march but was wounded in battle. He then fled to Thebes. The advance continued, and in "a half day" Memphis was taken. The family of Taharqu, his son Urana-Hor, and much treasure fell into the hands of the Assyrians. Fifty-five royal statues were taken to Assyria. Taharqu appears also to have failed to establish himself THE DECLINE 271 in Thebes. His army was scattered and he, a stranger in Egypt, received no support. Conse- quently he withdrew from Thebes and fled back to ''Kush," that is, to Nubia. Over the separate districts of Egypt Esarhad- don appointed twenty-two "kings," whose names all appear in an inscription of his son Ashur- bani-pal. But with each one an Assyrian officer was appointed as overseer as well as a host of Assyrian officials. The most southerly district was Thebes, from which it appears how limited the Assyrian rule was and also how exaggerated Esarhaddon's claims are when, on the basis of his achievement, he described himself as "king of the Mngs of Mutsur," or Lower Egypt, "Patiirisi/' or Upper Egypt, and "Kush." The Senjirli monolith also, as well as the inscription on the rock at NaJir-el-Kelh, near Beirut, states rather what was wished than what was accom- plished, when Taharqu is represented on his knees before Esarhaddon, with a ring in his lips, im- ploring mercy. This glory lasted only a few months, when Taharqu took up his designs afresh. The Ethiopian was no Egyptian, and his flight was only for the purpose of gathering a new army. In the meantime Esarhaddon had been in Assyria where an insurrection, in which the mov- ing spirit was his son, Ashur-bani-pal, called for his attention. Taharqu, doubtless, was aware of 272 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA this. At this juncture a "courier" arrived in Nineveh with intelligence that Taharqu had re- taken the whole land, was ruling as "king" in Memphis, and had either put to flight or slaughtered the Assyrian soldiery. The Egyp- tians who, for two thousand years, had been accustomed to submit to exploitation, no doubt looked upon this "restoration of orderly condi- tions ' ' with as much equanimity as they displayed in their acceptance of the numerous masters of earlier as well as of later times. After the in- ternal affairs of Assyria were settled, and Ashur- bani-pal and his brother, Shamash-shum-ukin, crowned in 668, the army was again available for Egypt. Esarhaddon himself set out thither — his presence in Assyria was no longer desired, and he was sufficiently familiar with the character of an Oriental kingdom to see that nothing remained for him but to die. This he did on the way, the same year, 668. The expedition, therefore, was carried through in the reign of Ashur-bani-pal, whose annals give to him the glory. The Orient, with its ancestor and family worship, has little reverence for the memory of the dead when once one is "buried in his house." ASHUIUBANI-PAL, 668-626. The causes which led to the crowning of Ashur- bani-pal have already been touched upon.^ When > P. 70. THE DECLINE 273 Esarhaddon was prepared for the crowning act of his work, viz., to announce his own ascent to the throne of Babylon which he had raised from her ruins, or that of his son Shamash-shum-ukin, whose mother was a Babylonian, the Assyrian party's time for action was ripe. In 669 "the king caused many nobles to be slain in Assyria" says the Babylonian (!) Chronicle; but Ashur- bani-pal says that when he was called to the throne and made co-regent in the beginning of 668 he "interceded" for the nobles. It was clearly Esar- haddon's purpose first to make Shamash-shum- ukin king of Babylon in order to insure for him, after his own death, the undivided sovereignty. But this was prevented. With the elevation of Ashur-bani-pal the Assyrian military and noble party triumphed over the Babylonian priests and commoners. During the long reign of Ashur-bani- pal, from 668 to 626, the military power of Assyria, with its mercenaries gathered from all lands, celebrated its final triumphs. The expedition to Egypt on which Esarhaddon died terminated quickly and favorably. The army with which Taharqu attempted to defend Lower Egypt was speedily worsted. Memphis was aban- doned and Taharqu fell back upon Thebes. In "one month and ten days" the Assyrian army stood before the walls of Thebes. Taharqu, not having confidence in the population of the capital. 274 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA withdrew from the city and threw up fortifications on both sides of the river higher up, apparently to block the valley of the river. The Assyrian army advanced only to Thebes, and Ashur-bani- pal, like his father, was compelled to confine his appointment of provincial, or district governors, to the regions north of that city. Taharqu died that year, or shortly after, in possession of his fortifications. His successor in Napata was Tanut-Ammon, his sister's son. He immediately took the field. The Assyrian army had apparently already withdrawn from Thebes, and the rest of Egypt fell easily into Tanut- Ammon 's hands. In Memphis alone did the Assyrian garrison offer resistance. Tanut- Ammon besieged them and took up a position in On (Heliopolis), which lay to the north. Again a courier appeared in Nineveh, and the Assyrian army hastened by forced marches to the relief of the besieged garrison. Tanut-Ammon abandoned the siege and retired upon Thebes, which he attempted to hold. But the city was conquered in 667 or 666 and the Ethiopians driven out of Egypt. Ashur-bani-pal was able to reappoint his provincial governors. Again, however, what was done was quickly undone. Naturally enough the Egyptians looked upon Assyrian rule only as a means to get rid of the Kushites. When that was done the next thing to be considered was deliver- THE DECLINE 275 ance from those who had helped them. A couple of years had barely passed before Psammetik, the son of Necho, to whom Ashur-bani-pal had given the districts of Memphis and Sais, declared his independence. Assyria's army was elsewhere engaged and Psammetik 's coup d'etat succeeded. With the help of the Assyrians they had expelled the Kushites, and then they chose the proper moment to repudiate their debt. The unselfish Ashur-bani-pal complained of similar base ingratitude on the part of Gyges of Lydia. About the beginning of his reign the Kim- merians were advancing to attack Lydia. They had crossed the Halys and pushed on westward. Since the Assyrians were united with the Ashkuza against the Kimmerians Gyges asked assistance of Ashur-bani-pal, whose Cilician and Cappado- cian possessions on the Lydian border were like- wise liable to attack. Ashur-bani-pal accordingly offered help — he prayed to Ashur, and so effectu- ally that Gyges actually won over the much feared enemy. He sent two chieftain captives in chains to Nineveh, where the inhabitants gazed in astonishment at the barbarians "whose language no interpreter understood." Therewith the thankless Lydian felt that he had sufficiently acknowledged his obligations. He ceased to send his messenger and "gifts" and supported the rebellious Psammetik — not with prayers, but with 276 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA troops. Ashur-bani-pal again lifted his hands in prayer to Ashur and Ishtar that "his corpse might be cast before his enemy and his bones carried away. ' ' The prayer was answered and the inso- lent offence expiated. The Kimmerians returned to the attack and Gyges was impotent before them. The land was overrun and Gryges fell in battle. His son, unnamed by Ashur-bani-pal, but called Ardys by Herodotus, succeeded him on the throne. Profiting by the fate of his father he sent to Ashur-bani-pal saying: "Thou art a king acknowledged of God. Thou cursedst my father and evil befell him. Me, thy humble servant, accept, and let me bear thy yoke." But Ashur- bani-pal, by his silence as to assistance, appears, for the time being at least, to have left the Lydians to their own resources. The Kimmerian storm first broke over Cilicia on the Assyrian border, although it is unlikely that Assyria was at all responsible for that. All this occurred in the year 668 and later. In the same year Ba'al of Tyre finally sub- mitted after Taharqu had abandoned Thebes. He had, as we have seen, to content himself with his island. The king of Arvad, Yakinlu, whose hopes were also in Taharqu, now paid tribute and sent his sons as hostages and pages to As- syria. In these earliest years of Ashur-bani-pal 's reign an expedition was also made against the THE DECLINE 277 rebelKous people of Man, on the Urumia Sea, where the Assyrian ally, Ashkuza, had become emboldened. The causes that led King Akhsheri to withhold his tribute are not far to seek. With the Ashkuza, the king's own allies, in the country the resources must have been seriously affected. Nevertheless, an Assyrian army advanced, an in- surrection arose, and Akhsheri fell. His son Ualli submitted to the Assyrians. About the same time expeditions were made against one or two Median chieftains, but Ashur- bani-pal did not advance as far in this direction as Sargon and Esarhaddon had gone. The East was already in the grip of the advancing multitude. In 660, or a little later, there was again war with Elam, and this time Elam was the aggressor. Since the time of Esarhaddon peace had prevailed with Urtaki. But now he was trying, in conniv- ance with certain Babylonian tribal chiefs, espe- cially with the Gambuli, to establish himself in Babylonia and for that purpose he despatched an army. Ashur-bani-pal does not appear to have had his army in readiness; the Elamites had reached almost to Babylon before he appeared and drove them back over the border. There he halted. It is clear, therefore, that Assyria re- mained on the defensive as regards Elam ever since Sennacherib's ill-fated venture.^ Urtaki died soon after. The complications which fol- 278 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA lowed the change of kings led to war with Teuin- man, his successor, who marched against North Babylonia, but was forced to retreat at Dur-ilu. Now, for the first time, the Assyrian army marched through the Zagros passes and appeared before the walls of Susa. The successes of Kuri- galzu II. and Nebuchadrezzar I.^ were in this in- stance repeated. With this war, about 655, Ashur- bani -pal's undertakings during the first half of his reign come to a close. All the succeeding wars of Ashur-bani-pal are bound up with the great insurrection of Shamash- shum-ukin which broke out in 652.^ The superior- ity of the Assyrian army was manifest in his overthrow, but the encouragement that Shamash- shum-ukin everywhere met with, and the hopes connected with his project in all parts of the king- dom, showed at the same time that the kingdom was held together by force only and that without its army of mercenaries it could not last. His treatment of Babylon was different from Senna- cherib's; nevertheless, as representative of the "Assyrian" policy, he certainly dealt with her in much the same way as Tiglathpileser and Shal- maneser had. Tangible evidence of this is seen in the fact that he, following their example, assumed the crown of Babylon and ruled there as King Kandalanu from 647 to 626. » Pp. 87, 94. 2 p. 124. THE DECLINE 279 Babylon's strongest support during the revolt came from Elam. The result was that a series of wars were waged against her which culminated in the conquest of Susa and the complete destruc- tion of the Elamite kingdom. But all that Assyria attained by this was that she, having made no effort to hold the conquered territory, played into the hands of the advancing Indo-Germanic tribes on the border. Just as in Urartu, so it was here; she had destroyed the buffer-state between herself and the enemy. The events con- nected with the overthrow of Elam reveal the last- ing confusion which followed, but a narrative of these belongs properly to the history of Elam. Within Babylonia the different tribes were like- wise won over from Shamash-shum-ukin. The Gambuli and Puqudi and some of the Chaldean states were severely chastised. The submission of the great grandson of Merodach-baladan in the Sea-Land also followed, and this contributed in its way to Elam's distress. Furthermore, the Babylonian revolt paved the way for a punitive expedition into Arabia. The Bedouins, ever eager for plunder, had sent an auxiliary force to Babylon, and, naturally enough, it was completely annihilated; but this was not enough. Since the land of "Aribi" was under Assyrian protection the defection must needs be punished. An Assyrian army marched through 280 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA the Syrian desert, plundering as it went, in a semicircle from Assyria to Damascus. This was soon after 648. Quiet, . however, did not long endure. Abiyate, the king who had been placed on the throne in place of Uaiti' soon "forgot the name of the great gods" and had to learn his lesson anew. Ashur-bani-pal's reports of these expeditions to Arabia are particularly oratorical and correspondingly obscure. "No bird of the heaven flies in the land of Mash" into which his army penetrated, "no wild-ass nor gazelle feeds there. ' ' In Phoenicia, Ushu, a city on the mainland oppo- site Tyre, and Akko were both visited and the revolters deported or killed. The "province Tyre," we see, had tried to become independent — that seems to have been the only practical result wrought in the West by the instigations of Shamash-shum-ukin. The king of Urartu, Sarduris III., compelled by the pressure of the Indo-Germanic tribes, now voluntarily submitted to Assyrian sovereignty. From now on we hear nothing more of Urartu. The new immigrants changed the old order of affairs, and a people now developed which after- ward is known as Armenian. Ashur-bani-pal closes the political account of his reign with Sarduris' salutation: "Lu shulmu ana sharri beliya" — "Peace be to the king, my lord." CHAPTER VIII THE FALL We have no information covering the last part of Ashur-bani-pal's reign — a comparatively long period, possibly of ten or fifteen years. In view of his victories we may assume that in general he maintained the glory of Assyria. This con- clusion is justified by the fact that until his death he remained king of Babylon. The extent to which this glory rested upon one man and his army is witnessed by the rapid dissolution which set in after him. Ashur-bani-pal's chief interest for us centres in his literary proclivities, rather than in his victories on the field of battle, although it was in connection with the latter that the name of ' ' Sar- danapalus" became famous through the semi- mythical figure of classical tradition. In his palace in Nineveh he collected a library of cunei- form tablets containing copies of all the Baby- lonian literary works and old inscriptions that were accessible. To the scanty remnant that has been recovered by excavation we owe almost all our knowledge of Babylonian literature, and of many other important documents whose originals 281 282 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA have perished. If through his victories Ashur- bani-pal is not distinguished from other Assyrian rulers he, nevertheless, is distinguished by his zeal in causing these documents to be written, and also as a student, a zeal for which we can almost for- give him that he was an Assyrian. Two kings ruled in Assyria after Ashur-bani- pal, the brothers ASHUR-ETIL-ILI AND SIN-SHAR-ISHKUN. ■^We know very little of the period during which they reigned. With the death of Ashur-bani-pal Babylon was lost, but not Babylonia, portions of which were held until the end. How long each of these kings reigned we cannot say. We are somewhat better instructed concerning the last days of the kingdom. The Chaldean Nabopolassar could no longer look to Elam, as his predecessors had done, for support on the throne of Babylon, for Elam was no more. He found instead a strong ally in Elam's successor, the Medes. From the time of Esarhaddon As- syria was in alliance with the Ashkuza who, as the neighbors of the Medes, were their natural enemies. In 609 Nabopolassar was in possession of Mesopotamia. He called himself "king of the World," and boasted of his victory over Shubari, the ancient name of Mesopotamia. Accordingly, the strength of Assyria must have been already THE FALL 283 broken. Soon afterward we find Cyaxares, the Mede, before Nineveh. The Ashkuza despatched a force of auxiliaries under the command of Madyas, the son of Bartatua, Esarhaddon's son- in-law, but these were defeated by Cyaxares. The fate of Nineveh was therewith sealed. The city fell about the year 607. SIN-SHAR-ISHKUN, the last king, is said to have destroyed himself in the flames — the fate which mythical tradition ascribes to Sardanapalus.^ The Median hosts carried out the work of plun- dering and destroying more thoroughly than was agreeable to their ally, for not only was Nineveh destroyed but also all the cities of Assyria, as well as those of Babylonia that remained loyal to Assyria, were completely despoiled. Harran, likewise, with its famous temple, suffered the same fate. And it was not until 54 years later— in the third year of Nabuna^id, when these "Umman- manda" under Astyages were driven off by Cyrus, that the city and temple reverted to the Babylonians, despite the ' ' friendship ' ' with Nabo- polassar and Nebuchadrezzar. Nabuna^d gives an interesting description of his restoration of the temple and re-establishment of its cult. " Abydenos relates, Mtiller-Didot, Frag. Hist. Gr., iv., 282 f., that Saracos (Sin-shar-ishkun) so perished. — Craig. 284 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Nineveh never arose again from her ruins, and fortunately so for us, for the mound has safely guarded the remains which otherwise would have been used for building material by a later age. Nabopolassar watched the procedure of his allies with little satisfaction now that his own lands were not spared. But, strange to say, the barbarians appear to have actually kept to their agreement. They retired from the conquered territory and observed the compact whereby the Tigris was to be the boundary between the respec- tive provinces. Whether this action is to be attributed to their undeveloped diplomacy, or whether, as one is. led to suspect, there lay behind the apparent good faith an unethical compulsion from without cannot be definitely determined. At present, however, nothing is known in support of the latter assumption. In any case the new dispo- sition of territory was effected. All the country to the north of the river region from Elam to Asia Minor fell to the Medes. Elam itself ap- pears, as in the earliest times, to have fallen to Babylonia. On the other hand, the relation of both to Harran for the present remains doubtful. Again there were kings of "Anzan and Suri" of which the oldest Babylonian inscriptions speak. Babylonia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine remained to Babylon; Assyria to the Medes. The Assyrian kingdom had therewith disap- THE FALL 285 peared from history. We have already frequently intimated why no effort to recover herself was possible — the country was in the hands of an army of mercenaries and a tribe of officials. There was no longer an Assyrian people. It was a matter of complete indifference in the provinces whether the governor exacted his extortions in the name of the king of Assyria, or in that of the king of Babylon. All interest languished except that which ever looked longingly for a change of mas- ters in the false hope that a change of rule would bring an improvement of conditions. In the prov- inces of Syria and Palestine action had been long since paralyzed. It was only in isolated cases, as in Judah, that life was manifested in a resist- ance that was easily overcome by a superior army. CHAPTER IX THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA The country of Mesopotamia and Assyria, lying to the north on the Euphrates and Tigris, has an essentially different character from Baby- lonia with its warm climate. The proximity of the mountain range moderates the heat of the great plain, and an abundant waterfall, with snow in the winter season, makes it not unlike the milder countries of Europe. The two great rivers lie far apart and their banks are for the most part rock-bound, rendering the extensive system of canals that was maintained in Babylonia impossi- ble. Smaller streams, especially the Khabur and Balikh in Mesopotamia traverse the- plains, fertil- izing large regions of the country. Between these lie broad steppes. There the nomads have always found a stamping ground, and thence they could sally forth on predatory excursions into the culti- vated lands. Until some worthy discoveries of material reaching back to pre-Assyrian times have been made in Mesopotamia it will be impossible to say what the essential features of Mesopotamian civil- ization were which distinguished it from the 286 THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 287 Babylonian. It is only the comparatively brief period of Assyria's predominance that comes within our range of observation. We have already seen that the earliest history of Assyria is guessed only dimly through the enveloping clouds, and the internal life and conditions are naturally less illuminated. The clearer light breaks first only when Assyria begins her con- quests and extension over Western Asia, and then she appears in the peculiar character which made her master of West Asiatic civilization. But the process of development from the beginning up to this point still awaits new documents for its determination. All that we are now able to do, in a measure, is to set forth the dominant features of Assyria as a ruling power. The region to the left of the Euphrates above the Lower Zab did not develop an independent culture. It was in every respect dependent upon the civilization of Babylonia and Mesopotamia. Its dominance when the great role of leadership in the world's civilization was nearing its end was purely political and won by might of arms. It is of prime importance, therefore, that we first look at the essential character of this dominion. We must assume that Assyria, when it began to expand in the fourteenth and thirteenth cen- turies, had still a fresh, vigorous population, and this presupposes a large peasant class. How it 288 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA developed we do not know, but the fact is attested by the ability of the country at that time to estab- lish colonies, which is possible only where there is an abundant peasant population. On the other hand, colonial enterprises imply agricultural un- rest; a surplus population has arisen, or, more properly expressed, the existing allotment of lands no longer permit of a further peaceful development. Assyria, consequently, in the later period of Ashur-natsir-pal and Shalmaneser II., had a very different population, modified, in part, also by the Aramaean immigrants. It is true that Ashur- natsir-pal still sent out colonies to newly con- quered or reconquered lands. But we can hardly suppose that these colonists were a surplus mass ; they were in all probability rather portions of a population that had lost their property which is indispensable to any true development of a peo- ple. We have already seen that only once, in a special emergency, did Shalmaneser II. call ' ' the land" to service. In the ninth century, therefore, Assyria's wars of conquest were already waged with a standing army, that is, with an army of mercenaries. This proves a complete change of the basis on which Assyria 's power rested. Here- after there is no Assyrian people who by their self-won victories expand, but only a military robber-state that, with an army recruited from all THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 289 lands, oppresses the peoples and compels them to furnish the means for their oppression. The people of Assyria, so far as it still existed, disap- peared, on the one hand, behind the priesthood, which had come to power here also, and, on the other, behind the throne with its feudal attach- ments. We noticed in the policy of Tiglathpileser ni. an attempt to put the state upon a broader basis, but the attempt did not succeed. The powerful reaction of Sargon restored again the character of Assyria, and sealed her doom. ^ Assyria's power rested, therefore, upon her army. This was a composite mercenary force made up of parts drawn from all quarters. Their support devolved upon the king, who had to pro- vide their pay. Hence the motive was always present for fresh expeditions of conquest or plun- der. On the one hand, an army so constituted demands occupation and booty, on the other, expe- rience showed that the means for its support never sufficed in the Orient unless it were forced from conquered lands. The greater- part of the land was in the possession of the temples and the feudal-lords ; the larger cities were exempt from taxation, and the comparatively small and op- pressed peasantry naturally could not furnish the necessary means. Thus the very basis of the state ^ organization gave rise to a constantly recurring incentive to fresh conquest. Assyria might have 290 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA abandoned the fundamental evil by pursuing the path she once followed had no rich neighbors, or less powerful ones, offered enticing allurements. The newly formed Aramaean states of Mesopo- tamia were reduced during the reign of Ashur- natsir-pal and the first part of Shalmaneser II. 's. This old region, for the most part, was thereby brought under Assyrian rule and made a per- manent part of the kingdom. The Aramasan in- habitants, that is, the priesthood and feudal-lords, were placed on an equality with the Assyrian. Assyria, in the larger sense, then included the lands as far west as the Euphrates. The com- pletion of this organization is the principal achievement of the second epoch of Assyrian his- tory. The result continued until the final fall of the whole political system. Extension beyond the Euphrates forms a new step in the development. This had been begun by Shalmaneser II. and his successors, but lasting results were first achieved during the New Assyr- ian kingdom by Tiglathpileser III. It was he who first deprived the lands to the west of the Euphrates of their independence and made them Assyrian provinces. But the successes attained here were by no means so great, for these states despite all that they owed in common to the old culture were, nevertheless, in population and civil- ization foreign to it. They were never assimilated THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 291 to Assyria. The cultural life of Asia Minor there exercised its influence and erected a barrier be- tween the civilizations east and west of the Euphrates that defied all the violent measures of politics. In the treatment of states that were to be sub- jected the methods were those adopted in all ages by similar governments, whose latest representa- tive in history is Turkey. The incessant disturb- ances in the cultivated regions, by nomads bent on plunder or appropriation of lands, demand that the freedom of the latter be somewhat curtailed as a guarantee of immunity from their attacks. The first step in this direction is the imposition of tribute, inasmuch as complete conquest and the establishment of the rule of the conqueror is impossible. The same procedure is then carried out with the neighboring civilized states. The king is summoned to tribute; if he yields he receives, as the vassal of Assyria, a free hand in the govern- ment of his country, but is required also to have his troops in readiness at the call of Assyria. Thus far, there is no interference on the part of the suzerain in the internal affairs of the tributary state. In cases where the demands were onerous, and the land's resources limited, the vassal was often nothing more than an Assyrian tax-gatherer who was held responsible for the prompt delivery of the tribute. The Assyrian king acknowledged 292 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA no obligation to guarantee protection to his vassal against his enemies in order to facilitate his dis- charge of the duties imposed. If by the induce- ments or pressure of a neighboring state he exchanged his vassalage to Assyria for that of his neighbor, an Assyrian army appeared to call the ''rebel" to account, although he may have yielded to necessity only. As a rule these vassals stood between two or three fires. They were responsible to the king of Assyria; on the other hand, the people who had to provide the heavy tribute were discontented. Thus parties arose, each of which, according to the dictates of its own interests, sought a different connection, one with Assyria, one with some other great power. In the writings of the prophets of Israel we have contempora- neous witness to such party politics. In the time of Amos the question in Judah and Israel was whether they should hold to Assyria or to Damascus and the Arabian Mutsri. Ahaz favored the former, Amos warned against the latter. After the fall of Damascus Hosea recognized only Assyria and Mutsri, so also Isaiah. After Taharqu's appearance an Egyptian party arose in opposition to the Assyrian. Between such parties stood the king, generally in a most unenviable position, for his safety depended upon his attach- ment to the stronger power. In the light of such conditions we may read the vacillation of Heze- THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 293 kiah, and in the activity of Jeremiah we may see the trying situation of the last kings of Judah, who, having to choose between Nebuchadrezzar and the Pharaohs, were at last overtaken by their fate. In the very nature of things, a relation such as this, which laid upon the vassal only oppressive obligations, would be dissolved as soon as an opportunity for revolt presented itself, viz., when the immediate appearance of an Assyrian army was no longer dreaded. If it did appear the fate of the rebel state was generally quickly sealed by the superior military force. If the Assyrian party did not prevail over its opponents and obtain pardon from the Assyrian ruler by the acceptance of the greater burdens, the country was thrown into a hopeless war, in which the city was de- stroyed, the leaders put to death and the besieged inhabitants enslaved. It is, however, to be borne in mind that, even in such cases, the atrocities practised in the Middle Ages, as, for example, in the border wars of the Germans and Slavs, were not perpetrated here. It was only the lead- ers of the inimical party and the responsible princes who were punished as rebels. We see, for example, that when Nebuchadrezzar took Jerusalem the Chaldean supporters were left undisturbed in their possessions. When a state was subdued wholly by force of 294 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA arms it was deprived of its independence and in- corporated as an Assyrian province. In the Mesopotamian lands this was attended with no great difficulties owing to the similarity of the population and the natural unity of the territory. But when Assyria invaded foreign countries it was hardly possible to force Assyrian rule upon their peoples, who had given proof, in their revolt, of the vitality of their own organization and insti- tutions. Such an attempt would have had as its consequence the certain destruction of the Assyr- ian officials on the next outbreak of discontent. So also the deportation of the greater portion of the population would have resulted in destroying, in large part, the productiveness of the new province. From the time of Tiglathpileser III., when Assyria was no longer able to send out colonists, an effort was made to meet the situation by ex- changing the inhabitants of newly conquered provinces lying on opposite sides of the empire. The deportation of the people of Samaria to Mesopotamia and Media, and the Jews to Baby- lonia, is familiar from the Old Testament. Ashurbanipal, likewise, after the overthrow of Shamash-shum-ukin, undertook the repopulation of Samaria with the inhabitants of Babylonian cities. Such exchanges and transplantings are frequently mentioned in the inscriptions of Tig- THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 295 lathpileser III. and Sargon II. The policy served a double purpose, the numerical maintenance of the population and a more ready acquiescence in Assyrian government. Eemoved from their native soil, composed of different elements, and unassimilated to the remnant of the old stock among which they were settled, the newly im- ported peoples were forced to rely upon the Assyr- ian officials. The tribal and class organization which had bound them together in the home lands, and had brought them into conflict with their oppressors, was dissolved, so that, for the time being, they were incapable of resisting. In these settlements of Assyria, effected on these, two principles of organization, a really civ- ilized and progressive government would have found the material out of which a new people would have been developed, one whose interests would have been inseparably linked Avith the Assyrian kingdom. But the governmental meth- ods of a predatory state that is dominated by the military and priestly classes are antagonistic to the advance of civilization. Assyria expected to receive from the new provinces, she had nothing to give them. The ultimate aim of Assyrian, as of all Oriental rule, is the enrichment of the gov- erning classes from the lowest tax-gatherer to the governor of the state, the one below pays tribute to the one above, and, finally, the governor 296 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA pays the king. That which the province received, if it ever received anything, was, therefore, a bagatelle in proportion to what was taken from it. The end was impoverishment and devastation. When the mother-land was no longer self-sustain- ing, as the result of the unjust apportionment of lands and possessions, and lived by exploiting the conquered states, its governmental methods applied to the latter must naturally prove as fatal for them. Just as Assyria bestowed no benefits upon the vassal states in return for the burdens she imposed so she failed, in her conception of obli- gation to her conquered provinces, to recognize the principle of do ut des. The shaknu, or pro- vincial governor, differed little from the former prince. The administration, however, which before was in the hands of the native bom was now intrusted to Assyrian officials. The material condition of the people was, therefore, not essen- tially modified by this change. It is not to be supposed that the Assyrian masters extorted more from their subjects than the native rulers had coming from them; least of all was that possible in the older civilized countries. The governor who succeeded the prince inherited all his duties and obligations. His administration guaranteed to the Assyrian king a greater secur- ity since he was dependent upon the support of THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 297 the latter in the strange land. The native prince, on the contrary, influenced by tradition and tribal feeling, was more apt to be hostile. In other respects the situation was unchanged. The shaknu had to provide for the needs of the prov- ince out of the revenues and, at the same time, dis- charge his obligations to the crown. He had to provide a contingent for military purposes and furnish it with means from his province. Above all he was required to raise and equip a provincial guard himself, except when the empire was seri- ously threatened with the loss of the province. The king had his own "royal army"^ which he was called upon to support, and he tried to roll the burden upon his officers. The governor had also his and to it the safety of the province was intrusted. In war time a portion of it was sub- ject to the call of the emperor. The position of the provincial governor was, therefore, compara- tively independent. It is evident, however, that there was a great temptation to risk an improve- ment of his fortune under Assyria by submitting to another conqueror, or striking for independ- ence in times of weakness. If, therefore, the Assyrian "empire," with its lack of unity in population, with a government that ignored the reciprocal support of its indi- vidual parts, disappeared suddenly after the faU ' Kitsir sharrvii. 298 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of Nineveh, making no attempt to recover and leaving not a trace behind, there is no ground for astonishment. It had been held together by an army of mercenaries and an official class — the empire vanished when they disappeared. That no one arose to charm to life again these leeches that lived upon the blood of the people is what was to be expected. As is the case in all mercenary armies recruits are taken indiscriminately. What is offered is accepted. We may, therefore, conclude that the barbarian lands on the border supplied the bulk of the material for Assyria as the Germanen supplied Eome in later times, the Normans and Britons Byzantium, the Turks the Caliphate. When a state was conquered a part of the con- quered army was generally added to the imperial army. This applies especially wherever, as, for example, in the Syrian states, it is to be assumed that the army was already organized on the mer- cenary basis. Of the different arms, the war chariot was the heaviest, most terrible, and most distinguished. The king is always represented in it in battle. It is frequently sculptured upon the monuments, drawn by two horses, with charioteer and warrior. It is not known where this method of fighting originated. A closed phalanx with shields and lances is attested for the period of the kings of THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 299 Lagash by the "Stele of Vultures," but this is the only indication we have of the composition of the army in the early Babylonian period. The domestication of the horse, and .when it became known to them, are questions closely related to the origin of the war chariot. We have no evi- dence of its use in Babylonia circa 3000 b.c, but no positive conclusion, for or against its introduc- tion, at this time is possible from the scantiness of our material. In the Kassite period horses and war chariots play an important part as they do in the Egypt of that age. Were they introduced with the "Canaanite" immigration, or were Northern influences through Hittite and other conquests responsible for them? However that may be the Greek epic proves that the war chariot was the main reliance in Asia Minor, where Hit- tite civilization was the connecting link between that of Western Asia and Greece, during the last period of the Assyrian kingdom. The cavalry was a much less important arm than the war chariot in which the nobility fought. It was never numerous and appears to have been, in the period best known to us, little in honor, and, probably, was used only for skirmishing and pursuit. An efficient horse was impossible without a proper saddle and stirrup. The main strength lay in the heavily armed infantry, who carried lances and short swords and were protected by 300 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA shields, coats of mail and helmets. They were supported by a light-armed body of bowmen. Methods of siege kept pace in their develop- ment with the necessities of the numerous wars. The usual fortifications could not as a rule long withstand the Assyrian attack. A rampart (the Eoman agger) was thrown up against the city walls and upon this they mounted battering-rams. The brick-built walls soon crumbled under the heavy blows of the iron-capped ram. Stronger works could not, however, be reduced in this way. Shalmaneser failed before the stone walls of Damascus, and whether Tiglathpileser stormed the city or took it by other means we do not know. The reduction of Tyre, which was first taken by Alexander, was attempted by throwing up earthworks with the object of cutting her off both by land and sea, but nothing was accom- plished owing to the besiegers' lack of a naval force. Upon the king or governor devolved the duty of equipping the army with weapons as well as of furnishing its support. The construction of an armory, which always had to be well stocked with arms, was inseparable from the erection of a pal- ace, the crowning work of an Assyrian ruler. The soldiers' support does not appear to have been the result of a payment in money drawn either from a definite tax or from the royal income. The THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 301 way in which it originated is still traceable. Orig- inally military service rested upon possession of the soil. While this was so in the case of the feudal tenants who were nobles, the disappear- ance of the agricultural class and its inability to perform military service led to a change; a tax was introduced, an aes militare, which henceforth the cattle-owner had to pay in lieu of personal service. This was given to the soldiers, and it appears indeed that each soldier kept a peasant who had to pay tax to him. Larger possessions would entail greater burdens. Probably later on other sources of income than land were similarly taxed. When the king found the support of the entire army too burdensome he sought to shift a part of the troops on to the shoulders of the high officials, who naturally objected to paying the king's troops as their own, and so the way was paved for all sorts of janizary outbreaks. Even in the most prosperous periods there are discerni- ble signs of minor troubles which must have become greatly aggravated when Assyria, shut up on all sides within her old territory, was no longer able to exploit and plunder the provinces. The most thoroughgoing excavations have thus far been undertaken in Assyria. For that reason our information on many matters in Assyrian history is much greater than it is in Babylonian. Very little is known of the German excavations in 302 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Babylon now proceeding with tlaorougliness and on a large scale. Those conducted by the French in Telloh bear upon ancient Babylonia, while only a small part of the finds of the Americans at Niffer have as yet been studied. From the Assyr- ian palaces unearthed at Nimrud and Kuyimjik we have obtained an accurate and extensive knowl- edge of Assyrian architecture and sculpture in the ninth and eighth centuries b.c. Ashur-natsir- pal's palace in Caleb belongs to the ninth, Tiglath- pileser's in Caleb, and Sargon's in Khorsabad to the eighth, Sennacherib's and Ashurbanipal's in Nineveh and Esarhaddon's in Caleb to the seventh. It is a constant characteristic of the Orient that the pride of powerful and weathy rulers leads them to erect magnificent buildings, especially palaces for themselves. Apart from the desire for a splendid house, the visible sign of their power, there may be also a touch of Csesarean madness in this. Apart from this the change of capital was connected with national policy; be- side, the wish was always present for a private and family sepulture, for it was as necessary in death as in life to have the protection of the family-gods without which the departed spirits would be restless, homeless wanderers.^ ' Ina biti-shu kibir {" he was buried in his house ") is the technical phrase for a happy end. Cf. Isa. xiv., 18. — Craig. THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 303 We have already seen that we cannot speak of an Assyrian culture. What is found there that is not Babylonian must rather be regarded as Mesopotamian. The sculptures of Arban, how- ever, are the . only art monuments we have of Mesopotamia in the pre-Assyrian period; but in them we see an early stage of Assyrian art. Even Harran, which is indicated as the site of ancient ruins by certain visible remains, has not yet found an explorer. No conclusions as to the sculptured lions seen there are yet possible, al- though they probably belong to the Assyrian period. Shalmaneser II. and Ashurbanipal, and later Nabuna''id, each restored the old sanctuary of the moon-god there, and it is quite improbable that early monuments are to be found in the upper strata. But as the history of Mesopo- tamia points to the western side of the Euphrates, to Syria and Palestine, and as the Babylonians gave to these lands the name of Suri, thereby pointing to an age-long connection, so also the Mesopotamian culture must be considered in the light of those civilizations that flourished west of the Euphrates and adjacent to it. But here again we are confronted by a great blank. The oldest sculptures of Senjirli might belong to an age which would permit of comparisons between Mesopotamia and Syria in these earliest times. And yet barbaric productions have also appeared 304 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA in times subsequent to the complete destruction of ancient civilization. The same may be said of the similar monuments of Tel-Halaf. Our knowledge, therefore, of Mesopotamia and Assyria, obtained from the sculptured monu- ments, holds good only of the later times. We see them at the end of many thousand years of development with its ups and downs. And even then the influence of Babylonia is plain — the ' material used in their immense buildings is brick, the same as was used in early Babylonia. Not- withstanding their proximity to the mountains the . Assyrians used neither quarried stone nor stone pillars. They followed the example of the Baby- lonians and built with clay brick, using cedar beams brought from the Amanus and Lebanon.^ The material for their sculptures they found at their doors, and therein they had a great advan- tage over Babylonia where Gudea was compelled to bring the stone for his statues from Arabia and Palestine. The mountains to the north of Nineveh provided them with marble and lime- stone with which they could case the brick walls. That the pre- Assyrian age was acquainted with the bull colossi, which guarded the city gates and palace doors, cannot be doubted in view of the colossi of Arban. Similar works of art have not yet been discovered in Babylonia, but the argu- > Cf. Isa. XIV., 8. THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 305 mentum ex silentio has little cogency in our pres- ent state of knowledge. The abundant wainscoting material, and the facility with which the soft limestone could be wrought, determined the peculiarity of the Assyr- ian buildings. Whereas Babylonia was confined to the moulded and glazed tile, decorated with various representations, the walls of the Assyrian palaces were adorned with alabaster slabs on which the deeds of the builder were written and illustrated by the hand of the sculptor. As a rule one or two rows of sculptured slabs, some" with, some without inscriptions, lined the walls on all sides. The inscriptions are one of our most important sources. The sculptures supply the only, as well as necessary, illustration of much in the inscriptions that otherwise would be unde- cipherable. Unlike the Egyptians with their delight in scenes from the family life these monu- ments represent only the things worthy of a king of Assyria. Nine-tenths of them have to do with the glorification of war, the other tenth with the royal buildings — a king of Ashur scarce under- stood aught else. It was not until the time of Ashurbanipal that a highly developed technique addressed itself to other objects. Eepresenta- tions such as we then find of the emperor feasting with his consort under the bower in the garden, are, however, rare exceptions in the long series 306 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of battle-scenes. Here we see the tent-life, here the king in his war chariot advancing to battle, the furious engagement, the pursuit of the enemy, the taking of the cities. Each expedition is por- trayed separately, and the different scenes are explained by accompanying inscriptions. By the side of these we find the glorification of the king's chase, building operations upon immense clay ter- races constructed by an enormous multitude of men, the transport of stone colossi upon sledges on rollers. There are some exceedingly life-like scenes from the chase among which the hunt of the wild-asses, and the dying lioness are splen- didly executed. But nothing is seen of family life. The only objects worthy of the Assyrian monarch's contemplation were the army and its exploits; even the gods retire from view, espe- cially in the later times. The antithesis of kingship and priesthood appears here as well as in the political development. The occasional glimpses we get of common life are always in connection with battle-scenes, the hunt, or build- ing operations. Among these are one or two pic- tures of tent-life and of the slaves at work on buildings, which exhibit well the character of the technique. The means employed in moving mas- sive materials we have already seen in the trans- port of the stone colossi. In the construction of the terraces for the buildings the earth was car- THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 307 ried in baskets upon the shoulders of long rows of slaves. Behind every six or seven followed a driver who plied the stick on the backs of the loitering ones. Art, especially in the execution of details, is marked by advance and studious development. Beginning with the sculptures from the palace of Ashur-natsir-pal in the ninth century we can fol- low the progress made down to the new Assyrian kingdom. The figures of the earlier artists are , comparatively stiff, and skill in presenting battle- scenes on a large scale is wanting, whereas the later sculptors manifest a greater freedom and variety both in conception and execution. The war-scenes from Ashurbanipal's palace mark the acme of Assyrian sculpture. Assyrian sculpture and Assyrian history advanced hand in hand. As power and wealth increased this art favored by Assyrian kings advanced — of any of the other fine arts we know very little. To what extent sculp- ture became popular, or whether popular interest had part in its development is not known. Since foreign mercenaries fought the Assyrian battles and Phoenician craftsmen built the ships, the artists also may have been imported. The expression "Assyrian art" can, therefore, be used only in the same limited sense as we use the words Assyrian people. We have no means of determining the history 308 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of development which unites the art of Telloh, more than two thousand years earlier, with this Assyrian art. The conception of that age, if not the execution, was more advanced. If the ideal is an essential element of art, the statues of Gudea seem to have been the product of a conception which might have resulted in work similar to that of the Greeks. "Whether this is a remnant of a Sumerian inheritance that was already on the decline, or whether the "Babylonian Semites," whose work it was, were so different from their later kinsmen are questions that cannot be an- swered. The first possibility has also the greater probability, but that is all that can be said. The same phenomenon confronts us here that meets us in the old Egyptian kingdom. Is the stiff stereotyped art of the later period a product of the Semitic spirit that became influential through the ' ' Canaanite ' ' migration and destroyed in both lands the germs of free development which had been received from the older inhabitants'? One thing is at least clear : the feeling and search for an ideal of beauty which, whether as beginning or end of a development, is recognizable in the art of Lagash, and of the time of Naram-Sin, has been abandoned, and a stiff, mechanical imitation of external nature has succeeded. One is the more inclined to look upon this as a result of Semitism, in view of the fact that the same spirit is present THE CIVILIZATION OF ASSYRIA 309 in all things Semitic. Its defect is the utter want of an imagination that can dream of a more beauti- ful world. Semitic poesy is a magnifying and enlarging of the real world; all the surrounding magnificence is exaggerated and distorted ; that is the end of the Semite's dreaming. He never became other than a child whose ideal good consists in an unlimited provision for material enjoyment. Of intellectual delights, and the fas- cinations of life found in the beautiful world of the imagination he had never an inkling. The fact that the Babylonians and Assyrians did not study the nude human figure has been given as the reason that their art never reached the ideal despite the excellence of its technique. But this explanation does not suffice. We actu- ally possess small Babylonian statues of Ishtar and also the torso of a large statue of a female figure, probably also representing Ishtar, which belong to the time of the Assyrian king, Ashur- bel-kala. The truth is, on the contrary, that we have to do here with a still undeveloped mind that looked upon the human body as something base, another proof that the Oriental never, even in theory, rose above the immature, childish point of view. The world and all the glory thereof finds its expression for him in costly draperies — beyond this his phantasy does not reach. Conse- quently the artist betrays his ideal of beauty in 310 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA his painfully accurate efforts to display the costli- ness of his master's robes. Everywhere we meet the child — who knows of nothing grander than to be "a king," and to whom a double portion of sugar is better than being right. In every work of the imagination the same defect appears — bigness not beauty is the Oriental's ideal. The same childishness makes him cling rever- ently to what is ancient and traditional, and his fondness for the past blinds his eyes to the demands of the present. In so far as pertained to the representation of the gods — whereby the essence of religion is brought to view — art was governed by the revered and time-honored forms. Consequently in the developed technique of statues of the gods of the Assyrian age we can trace their origin from the old crude stone pillars worshipped by the nomads. Ill— THE NEW BABYLONIAN CHALDEAN KINGDOM THE NEW BABYLONIAN- CHALDEAN KINGDOM CHAPTER I NEBUCHADREZZAR At the death of Ashurbanipal the Chaldean, Nabopolassar, was on the throne of Babylon. To which of the small Chaldean principalities he belonged we do not know. He probably put on the crown of Bel with the good-will, or, at least, with the sufferance of Assyria. At first he sought at all events to avoid an open rupture with Ashur- etil-ili, thus recognizing his suzerainty. Baby- lon was all that he possessed at the first ; the other parts of Babylonia remained Assyrian. The details of his advance are unknown. One thing is certain, namely, that Babylon did not enter the lists against Assyria in reliance upon her own strength, but she first disclosed her plans when she entered into an alliance with Media. More- over, as the royal house of Assyria was related by marriage to the Ashkuza, so the son of Nabo- polassar was married to a Median princess. 313 314 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA We have already seen that Mesopotamia was in the possession of Nabopolassar from 609 onward, and that the destruction of Assyria was primarily the work of the Medes. When, how- ever, this was accomplished Nabopolassar was old, or ill, and the reins of government had already passed to the hands of his son, Nebuchadrezzar II. The task of subduing the Western provinces, therefore, devolved upon him. But this could not have been attended by any insuperable difficulties, for the hatred of Assyria made it impossible for the provincial governors to assert authority after the fall of Nineveh. It was, therefore, to be ex- pected that they would submit to the new master. Any attempt on the part of separate states to declare for independence was naturally hopeless. In the meantime, however, another power had to be ousted from the Western provinces. Necho II. of Egypt, rightly judging the situation, saw that the hour had come to win back the provinces that from the times of Thothmes and Amenophis had been lost. While the Medes lay before Nine- veh and Nabopolassar seized Mesopotamia Necho marched on Palestine and Syria, taking full pos- session of both. In his advance he met with no united opposition, and the single-handed effort of Josiah to block bis way at Megiddo in 609 or 608 proved fateful for the Judean king.^ Necho had ' 2 Ki. xxiii., 29. NEBUCHADREZZAR 315 made his headquarters at Eiblah, on. the Orontes, and from this point he controlled for some time affairs at Jerusalem. In 605 he advanced as far as Karchemish. He was, therefore, prepared to cross the Euphrates and, therewith, invade the territory that had been taken by Babylonia after the fall of Nineveh. At this point he was met by Nebuchadrezzar, the commander of the forces, and defeated, forced to abandon Palestine and Syria, and retreat to Egypt before the pursuing Babylonian army. Thereupon Nebuchadrezzar received, with little opposition, pledges of fealty from the governors and took possession as far as the boundary of Egypt. It had fallen to the lot of this last successful ruler of Babylonia to accom- plish at the beginning of his career that which had been struggled for in vain for centuries — the West was again brought into subjection to Babylon as it was when her might and culture were at their zenith. But this result was not won through an awaken- ing of the power of the Babylonian people. Baby- lon was, as she had been for centuries, in the hands of conquerors who sought historical eclat for their power through the ancient renown of this home of culture. In the centuries of conflict between Assyrians and Chaldeans the oft defeated but undeterred intruder won in the end. Nebu- chadrezzar, before whom Palestine now trembled, 316 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA was a Chaldean. The Old Testament, also, in its contemporary records, designates these repre- sentatives of the last Babylonian dynasty as Chaldeans. About the close of 605, when Nebuchadrezzar was still engaged in Palestine, he received word of Nabopolassar's death, and of disorders that aimed at crowning a Babylonian. He set out at once by forced marches for Babylon, choosing the shortest route, through the desert. Arriving at the right moment, the day appointed for the New Year's Festival, he headed the solemn pro- cession of Bel, thereby declaring himself king of Babylon. His fame does not rest only upon the accident that he destroyed the independence of Judah, but also upon the fact that during his long reign Babylon again rose to prosperity and power. The external evidence of this is visible even in his extensive building operations of which we read in many of his inscriptions. Babylon was rebuilt by him, after the work had been inaugu- rated in part by his father, Nabopolassar, and the fortification walls, towers, moat, etc., which were the wonder of that age, were erected. He constructed the "Median Wall" stretching from Sippara on the Euphrates to the Tigris, near Opis, in order to dam the water so that in case of need he could flood the whole country to the north and thus prevent the entrance of an enemy NEBUCHADREZZAR 317 into the territory between the two rivers. Below Babylon a similar defence was found that pre- vented an attack from that quarter. He built the great terraces which became famous as the "Hanging Gardens of Semiramis," and he renewed the chief temples in all the great cities. Unlike the Assyrian kings who preface every report concerning a building operation with a grewsome tale of battles won, the Babylonian, and especially Nebuchadrezzar, tells only of the works of peace. For this reason we have practically no information left us by Nebuchadrezzar of his expeditions. Apart from his wars in Palestine we know only of his fruitless siege of Tyre, which lasted for thirteen years, and one or more Egyp- tian campaign. A fragment of a hymn mentions a war against Amasis in 568. In the same con- nection Putu (Yavan) appears as an ally of Egypt. In this name we have probably a desig- nation of the ^olians and especially of Samos that was then in control of the northern part of the Archipelago. Pittacus, who had obtained the upper hand by the expulsion of certain noble houses, was ruling there at the time. Among those expelled were Alkaios the poet, and his brother, Nutimenides. The latter served in the Babylonian army, and, after he had returned home, wrote of the heroic deeds he had witnessed. These Oriental heroes are all modelled after the 318 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA same pattern. If David had not slain Goliath^ lie would surely have fallen before Nutimenides, for, in the verse of his brother, marvels of might and skill such as this were the peculiar marks of the hero. The connection of the Orient with Greece in earliest times here again appears to view. Pittacus sought and obtained aid from Egypt ; his opponents, therefore, go to Babylonia. The two great Oriental states play the same role in the isles of Greece that they played in Palestine, espe- cially in Judah. Whether Nebuchadrezzar ever invaded Egypt as Ezekiel prophesied ^ we do not yet know. At all events he did not hold her long in subjection even though he may have won some victories similar to those of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. His chief pride and his claims to remembrance as a wise ruler lay in the arts of peace. There is not the slightest trace to be found in what we know of his activities of any such mental aberra- tion as that which is recorded of him in the grotesque story of the late apocalyptic Book of Daniel, Chap. IV. ' We may, perhaps, refer to the fact, in passing, that David's claim to this honor is very doubtful. II. Sam. 21, 19, makes Elhanan of Bethlehem the hero, in opposition to I. Sam. 17, 4 ff. The author of I. Chron. 20, 5, noting the contradiction, changed "of 'Bethlehem" to "Lahmi the brother of" in the interest of har- mony. — Craig. 2 Chap. 29, 19 f. CHAPTER II THE RELATION OF THE NEW BABYLONIAN KINGDOM TO MEDIA The west was tlie only direction in which Baby- lonia could extend her power. East and north where the Assyrian kings were wont to wage wars disappear; Elam and Urartu are no more. The great Median kingdom now ruled there from Elam as far west as the river Halys, the boundary of Lydia. The existence of Babylonia was now dependent upon this barbarian kingdom in whose p'ower lay the fate of Western Asia. Babylon's relation to it was much like that of Italy to the German empire of the Middle Ages. As long as Nebuchadrezzar lived the relation appears to have been friendly. In fact the destruction of Nineveh by the Modes first made the dynasty of Nabopo- lassar supreme in Babylonia, and it was certainly due in large measure to Cyaxares that its rulers were allowed to hold it. It would almost appear further that intermarriage with this barbarous royal house was of greater significance in Nebu- chadrezzar's case than such marriages are wont to be where state politics are more highly devel- oped. Herodotus tells of Nebuchadrezzar's par- 319 320 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA ticipation in Median affairs when war broke out with Lydia, the third of the then great powers. During that war, in which the eclipse of the moon predicted by Thales occurred, Nebuchadrezzar assumed the role of peace-maker, in which he was supported by Syennesis of Cilicia. But the youth- ful dynasty, whose fame is coupled with the name of Nebuchadrezzar, was destined with his death to lose its glory. AMEL-MARDUK, 561-560, became king in 561. He is the Evil Merodach of the Old Testament. After two years of rule he was dethroned "because he ruled unjustly and tyrannically." This unfavorable judgment of him is given both by Berossus, a priest of Bel and Babylonian historian, who wrote in the Seleucid period, and by Nabuna'id, from which it appears that it was the judgment of the priesthood whose desires even Nebuchadrezzar never succeeded in stilling despite all of his temple-building. All that we know of Amel-Marduk is that he dealt friendly^ with Jehoiachin of Judah whom Nebu- chadrezzar deported to Babylon. He was mur- dered in the second year of his reign, and NERGAL-SHAR-UTSUR, 559-556, his brother-in-law, was placed upon the throne in 559. No attempt was yet made to go outside of ' Vid. II. Kings, 25, 27 f. THE NEW BABYLONIAN KINGDOM 321 the Chaldean royal family for a ruler, but whether Nergal-shar-utsur, or Neriglissar, as his name appears in Greek, was himself a Chaldean is not clear. Little is known of him also, yet Nabuna' id ascribes to him services in the protection of the country. In addition to works of a religious char- acter such as the repairing and beautifying of the temples he also gave attention to the construction of canals. His works of defence may be an indi- cation that the Medes were already beginning to manifest an interest in favor of the dethroned house. He was succeeded by his son, LABASHI-MARDUK, who was still in his minority. After nine months he was deposed, because, as the above mentioned sources likewise agree in declaring, "he showed evil tendencies." The real cause appears, how- ever, in the choice of his successor, a Babylonian, who, apparently, was a more docile tool of the priesthood. This last king of Babylon, NABUNA' ID, 555-538, is, at first sight, a remarkable individual. With- out troubling himself in the least he apparently looks on while the Medes, and afterward the Per- sians, take possession of the land. Instead of engaging in works of defence he turns antiquarian and busies himself in the excavation of the ruins 322 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA of old temples and the determining of the age of their builders. The information he has given concerning his discoveries are exceedingly valu- able for us, but neither his discoveries nor the construction of new temples in which he was so zealous was of any service to his tottering throne. The Medes do not appear to have idly watched the overthrow of the friendly dynasty to which they were related by marriage. It is possible, as we have suggested above, that Nergal-shar-utsur had found it necessary to protect himself against them. Now that the breach with Babylon was complete they appear active again in Mesopo- tamia, which, indeed, they may have never com- pletely evacuated. Even then at the beginning of his reign Nabuna^d manifested his real character. "While the Medes besieged Harran, the old city of the moon-god, or still occupied it, Nabuna'id did nothing but indulge in pious dreams that the gods would deliver it out of their hands. And, strange to say, his dreams came to pass — Asty- ages was vanquished by Cyrus, and, for a time, Mesopotamia was at rest. But the gods do not seem to have revealed to the pious king that the conqueror of the Medes might prove a more dan- gerous enemy to him. For the time being he rejoiced over his apparent gain and hastened, with thankful heart, to rebuild the temple of the moon- god in Harran. To this end he taxed and forced into service his subjects "from Gaza, the border of Egypt, the Mediterranean, and Syria to the Persian Gulf." He had become great by an- other's victory: that is usually a misfortune for any man. CHAPTEE III THE FALL OF NEW BABYLONIA. THROUGH THE PERSL^NS In the meantime, Cyrus, the Persian, had added to his strength. India was brought into subjec- tion, with the territories previously reduced by the Medes, and so the only great power to which Babylonia could look for support disappeared. Then he advanced against Babylonia, now hemmed in on all sides. In the closing years of the Babylonian empire we meet again the same conditions that have fre- quently appeared before in times of danger, and that appeared in Israel and Judah as well in times of national crises. Internal party strifes render defence impossible. Nabuna'id was placed upon the throne by the party in opposition to the old Chaldean royal house. He is distinctly called a "Babylonian" to emphasize his non-Chaldean origin. He appears to have been a "diplomat" who sought to humor both parties, the priestly and the military-official. Every one of his inscrip- tions shows how intent he was on winning the favor of the priests by building temples and mak- ing provision for the cultus. But this could only 324 THE FALL OF NEW BABYLONIA 325 serve to increase the discontent of the rival party, which had the army and its strength at their command. The result was that he was shut up a prisoner in his palace and the government was intrusted to his son, Bel-shar-utsur, the Belshaz- zar of the Old Testament, to be conducted in Nabuna'id's name. Political hypocrisy had here become such a fine art that the official records do not fail to make the father, who was held a pris- oner by the son, pray for the prosperity of the latter. Cyrus, starting from Arbela and crossing the Tigris to the south of the ruins of Kalkhi, first took possession of Mesopotamia. In the follow- ing year, 546, he advanced from Elam into South Babylonia. Nabuna'id had the gods of the larger cities, Ur, Erech, etc., brought to Babylon and felt safe under their protection. Nothing is known of what happened for the next five years. In 539, however, we find Babylon surrounded. The defence by inundation, made possible by Nebu- chadrezzar's Median Wall and the supplementary works to the south of Babylon, is probably to be credited with the brief respite. During these years, however, Cyrus was not able to effect an entrance into Babylon either from Mesopotamia on the north or from the regions to the south. The country round about was turned into a marsh, as Holland was in more modern times under similar 326 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA circumstances. Within this inundated region lay the "kingdom of Babylon, large enough to sup- port itself so long as it was not invaded. ' ' There is a reminiscence of this in Herodotus ' story that Cyrus was engaged for a couple of years draining the Diyala in order to accustom his army to the drainage of canals, thus obtaining the necessary skill for the siege of Babylon where he diverted the Euphrates. As a matter of fact Herodotus missed the purpose of the work which was the construction of a passage through the inundated region, for the Diyala empties at Opis, the ter- minus of the Median Wall. With this agrees the fact that the Babylonian army under Belshazzar actually met Cyrus there between Opis and Sip- para in 539, after the passage had been con- structed. The Babylonians were defeated. Nabu- na'id, who was now set free in Babylon, sought to organize a defence, but it was too late — the army was destroyed and in the city itself Cyrus' entrance was welcome. Babylon yielded to a Per- sian army under the lead of Ugbaru (Gobryas). The great fortifications of Nebuchadrezzar were not defended. The Persians were received as the Assyrians had once been received,^ as deliverers. When Cyrus entered four months later he was proclaimed king, and one of his first political acts was to return the gods which Nabuna'id had » P. 62. THE FALL OF NEW BABYLONIA 327 brought to Babylon to tbeir own cities, an act which was well calculated to win for himself the favor of the Babylonian priesthood. Thus ended the history of Babylonia; Babylon had become a Persian province. It is true that the ancient splendor, that had so unexpectedly blazed forth again before the end, was not com- pletely forgotten — a couple of attempts were later made to win back her independence; but these struggles were of short duration. In the prov- inces the same relations were maintained toward the Persians as with Nebuchadrezzar. Nabu- na'id, who did nothing whatever to protect them was simply given up for Cyrus. Southern Baby- lonia, which Nabuna^d abandoned and whose gods he carried off, certainly regarded Cyrus as a deliverer. He in his turn was wise enough in the use of his power to loosen the reins somewhat in the provinces. He not only returned the gods to the cities of Babylonia, but he showed the same favor to many another province also that had long been subject, thus acknowledging its right of self- government, as in the case of Judah, perhaps also Sidon. So too, these provinces, which enjoyed greater internal liberties under his rule, and were less weighted with heavy burdens, must have seen in Cyrus a deliverer from the Babylonian yoke. A new epoch in the history of civilization begins at this point. Persia had already taken Asia 328 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA Minor before the conquest of Babylon and thus had come into touch with Greek civilization. From now on the struggle, which came to be deter- mining in the development of the peoples of the Occident, is no longer upon Asiatic soil. It is true that Persia, as the heir of Babylon, in opposi- tion to the Greeks, is in a certain measure at least in possession of an advanced culture. But this culture was more or less effete since it was no longer suffused with the fresh life of the people. It was soon surpassed by the fresh and vigorous life that appeared in Greece. INDEX Abd-milkot, Ithobal's successor at Sidon 264 — , in alliance with Sanduarri of Fundi and Sizu 264 Abeshua, King of Babylon 59 Abil-sin, King of Babylon 59 Abizate, King of Syria 279 Ab-nun-na-ki (Ash-nun-na-ak) 72 n. Abraham, from Ur and Harran 1O8 — , his cult at Hebron 170 Abu Habba (Sippar) 24 Abu (ad) shi, King of Babylon 89 Adad, god of the atmosphere 152 Adad-aplu-iddin, King of Babylon.. 96, 204 — , gave large dowry to Ashur-bel-kala 204 Adad-nadin-shum, King of Babylon. . 194 Adad-nirari I., King of Assyria.. 85, go, 171, 189, 191, 198 — , defeated Nazi-manittash 90 — , pushing out for dominion 171 — , son of Arak-den-il 191 — , "King of the World" 191 — , held Mesopotamia 191 Adad-nirari II., King of Assyria . . 103, 209 — , his reign begins the "Assyrian Eponym Canon " 210 — /'King of the World" 210 Adad-nirari III., King of Assyria.. 107, 182, i88, 189 — , confusion in his dates .... 108, 128, 129 — , continued the wars of his prede- cessor ,-229, 230 — , saw a reform in religious teaching . 232 Adad-nirari IV., King of Assyria 235 — , son of Ashur-dan III 234, 235 — , perhaps father of Tiglathpileser III 236 n. Adad-shum-iddin, King of Babylon. 87, 194 Adad-shum-utsur, King of Babylon. 91, 194 Adoni-baal in Siana 220 «. Adonis (Taramuz) i59 Adrammelech. son of Sennacherib. . 260 n. Adu-metash, King of Babylon 89 i^olians, the 317 Africa i44 «• Afrin river 215 Agade, its kings 51- 5^ — , its god Ishtar 152 Agu-kakrime, King of Babylon, ..72, 73, 77, 89, 173 — , King of Kashshu and Akkad 72 — , King of Padan and Alman 72 ~, King of Gutt 72 — , King of the Four Quarters of the World 73 — , His gifts to Babylon 73 — , also Agum-kakrime 89 Agum-kakrime, King of Babylon .... 89 Agum-shi, King of Babylon 88 ■ — , read also" Bibe-yashi" 88 Ahab of Israel 220, 221 Ahazof Judah 242, 292 — , shut up in Jerusalem 242 — , vassal to Assyria 292 Ai (Malik)-dara-kalamama, King of Babylon 69 Akhi-Yababa, Aramasan prince 212 Akhuni, prince of Bit-Adini 213 — , worst enemy of Assyria 213 — , submitted to Ushur-Natsir-pal 213 — , joined the Assyrian army 213 Akhuni, submitted to Shalmaneser II, 218 — , his territory was annexed to Assyria 218 Akkad 29, 51, 72 — , its King, Khala-lama 46 n. Akkadian, a Sumeriaa idiom 14. 51 Akko 80,81,280 — , was visited by Ashur-bani-pal .... 280 Akhsheri, King of Man, withheld trib- ute 277 — , was punished and slain by Ashur- bani-pal 277 A-kur-gal, son of Ur-nina, and King of Lagash 41, 42 — , table of descendants 42 Alashia in Mesopotamia 174 Aleppo (Khalman) 219 Alexander romance 159 Alkaios, the poet, expelled from Samos 317 Alman _. 72 Alzi in Armenia 224 Amanus, Mount . . . .32. 140, 216, 221, 304 - — , reached by Shalmaneser II 223 Amasis, Nebuchadrezzar II. had war against 317 Amel-Marduk, King of Babylonia . . . 320 — , the Scripture Evil Merodach 320 — , ruled unjustly and was dethroned. . 320 — , on friendly relations with Jehoia- chim of Judah 320 ■ — , murdered in the second year of his reign 320 Amemphis III., King of Egypt . . 78, 81, 82 — , his letters at Tel-Amama... 78, 79, 172, 174, 175. 176 — , his death 82 — , contemporary of Buma-buriash. . . 89 — , has correspondence with Kadash- man-Bel 89 — , his correspondence with Dushratta, 174. 17s Amenophis IV., King of Egypt 78 — , his letters at Tel-Amama... 78, 79* 172, 189 — , letter from Buma-buriash 189 — , his reform or revolution 231, 232 — , his monotheistic teaching 232 — .rescued Israel from Damascus.. 232, 314 — , gave ear to Jonah's teaching . . 232 American expedition to Nippur (Nif- fer) 88,302 Ammi-Satana. King of Babylon 59 Ammi-Tsadoc, King of Babylon 59 Ammon, Ba'sa (Baasha) of 220 Ammon plotting with Moab against Assyria 253 — , paid tribute 257 Amos the prophet 292 Amq, north of the sea of Antiochia ... 215 — , acknowledged Assyrian power. 223, 240 Arhurru, King of 261 Anchiale (Kundi) 264 ». Andia, northeast of Parsua 229 An-ma-ilu, King of Babylon 69 330 INDEX Andad-nirari in 112 Anemit in Sippar, temple of ip4 Anti- Lebanon 34 »- — , Shalmaneser II. at 222 Antiochia, sea of 215 Anu, the sky-god - .25, 137 Anu-banini, King of Lulubi 178 — , left an inscription 178 Anunit 24 Anzan, in relation to Babylonia. . 47, 48, 74 Anzitene traversed by Shalmaneser II. 224 Apocalyptic calculations 255 n. Arab auxiliaries in Palestine 256, 257 — , defeated by Sennacherib 257, 258 — , tribes in contact with Assyria 266 Arab king, Zabibi , 240 Arabia, its place in ethnic migrations. .7, 8, 21, lOI — , the home of the Semites 9, loi — , west was Melukha 48 — , gave the Chaldeans 10 1 — , exports from 161, 304 — , was expected to help Hezekiah 257 — , was invaded by Esarhaddon 263 — , was punished by Ashur-bani-pal. .270, 280 — , in political complications.. 124, 220, 266 — , North 247 — , North-west 258 — , Eastern, for migrations loi — , West 266 — , South, under Kushite rule 266 n. Arabians, their place in the migrations 21 Arad-Marduk, "servant of the god Marduk " 92 n. Arad-shum-iddin, King of Babylon . . 91 — , deposed by Kidin-Khutrutash .... 91 Arak-den-il (Pu-di-il), King of Assyria, 191. 206 — , held the tribes in check 191, 206 Aram 19 Aramseans, in relation to the migra- tions 22, 206 — , in the tumult at Borsippa 109 — , subdued by Shalmaneser I . . . .192, 206 ^, hordes defeated by Assyria .... 198, 206 — , spread in Mesopotamia 204, 288 — , Immigration 206 sq. — , force of the migration 209 — , took Babylonia 206, 207, 288, 289 — , held Mesopotamia 208, 209, 288 — , independence taken away by Ashur-Natsir-pal I 211, 288 — , tactics against Assyria 211, 212, 213, 288 —, northern parts of Syria, beyond the Euphrates 213 Aramaean and Syrian synonymous . . . 208 Aramaic migration . .21, 22, 102 sq.^ 206 sq., 28S — , tribes or kingdoms ..102, 116, 117, 118, 191 — , Mesopotaraian Kingdom. 170, ip8, 204, 288, 289 Arame of Gusi 219 Ararne, King of Urartu 224 Araziah 229 Arbach, in Western Media 75 Arbael, visited by Shalmaneser II 224 Arban in the Khebur valley 169 — , sculptures at 303, 304 Arbail (Arbela), modern Irbil 25, 177 Arbela (Arba'il) 177, 178, 179, 214 — , Cyrus* starting point for Babylon.. 325 Arch, in building I39i I4i) ^44 — , used by the Babylonians 141 Archipelago, the 3i7 Aribi, " Kingdom of " 266, 279 — , its queen and gods deported 266 — , Ashur-bani-pal marched through 279 Aribua, Assyrian colony 240 — , belonged to Hamath 240 Ardys, son of Gyges of Lydia 276 — , succeeded his father 276 — , learned fidehty to Assyria 276 Armenia 48, 181, 192, 201, 224 — , Sarduris II, of 238 — , lost UUuba 239 — , enemy of Assyria 260 — , developed from Urartu 280 Arpach in Assyria 185 Arpach, its relation to Bit-Agusi (or Bit-Gusi) 2 10 K. — , as a place 215 — , suffered from Adad-nirari III .... 229 — , in league against Assyria 247 Arsanias, the 224, 225 Artatama, grandfather of Dushratta. . 174 — , contemporary with Thothmes IV. . 174 Arts, the 139 sq. — , their development difficult in Babylonia 139, 140, 303 sq. — , easier in Egypt 140 — , necessary conditions 139, 140 — , traced in Babylonia and Assyria 302 sq. — , marked in execution of details 307 — , progress in the new Assyrian King- dom 307.308,309 Ar\'ad sent tribute to Ashur-Natsir- pal 202, 215 — , submitted to Shalmaneser II 220 — , Matinbaal of 220 — , independent 240 — , paid tribute to Sennacherib 256 — , was destroyed by Esarhaddon 264 — , sent tribute to Assyria 276 Ashdod 243 n. — , rested on Arab support 253 — , became an Assyrian colony 253 — , its gods were taken to Assyria. . 253 n. — , its capture mentioned by Isaiah ... 253 Ashkuza, an Armenian state 267, 277 — , its king is Bartatua 268 — , was in alliance with Assyria. . . 268, 277, 282 ■ — , neighbors of the Medes 282,313 — , sent auxiliaries to help Nineveh . . . 283 — , related to Nabopolassar by mar- A I'^^^i: ■■':, 313 Ashurthegod 257, 276 Ashur (KEil'a-Shergat) 25,76, 180, 19a, 217, 226, 275, 276 — , suzerain of Babylonia 106 — , "land of Ashur " 177, 204 — , city of 177, 17Q, 192, 210 — ,\ts paiesis 177, 179, 180 — , its culture 178 — , temple restored in 179 — , under Ticlathpileser I 179 —, as dependent 180, 186 — , as independent 180 — , Semites of, their history and char- acter 181 sq., 210 — , under a prmce 185 — .dependent on Babvlon 186, 210 — , worshipping Marduk 186 — , its rival Kalkhi founded . .193, 217, 234 INDEX 331 Ashurbanipal, King of Assyria. .86 «., 170, 272 sq. — .his library 89, 138 «., 139, 155, 261, 281 — , called Kandalanu in Babylonia.115, 125 278 — , King of Assyria 123 — , was aided by Esarhaddon 123 — , son of Esarhaddon 123, 271 — , brother of Shamash-shum-ukin, 123, 125, 272, 273 — , made war on Babylon 125 — , took and wore the crown of Baby- lon 125, 244, 278, 280, 313 — , his engineering work 139, 170 — , known as Sardanapalus 281 ■ — , favored the party of the nobles and army 245,273 — , can boast of his fine education 261 — , his praise as literary collector . .281, 282 — , inscription of 271 — , headed insurrection against his father 271 — , and his brother crowned 272 — , headed the Assyrian military party 273 • — , continued Esarhaddon's expedi- tion into Egypt 273,318 — , led his army as far as Thebes 273 — , assisted Gyges of Lydia 275 — , punished him for rebelling 275, 276 — , made expeditions against Man, Media and Elam 276, 277 — , drove Urtaki and Elam out of As- syria 277 — , used mercenaries to support his ]X)wer 278 — , his dealing with Shamash-shum- ukin's insurrection 125, 278 — , his Assyrian policy _. 278 — , plundered from Assyria to Damas- cus 280 — , the political account of his reign 280 — , close of his reign 281 — , his palace in Nineveh 302 — , restored the sanctuary at Har- ran 303 — , artistic advance in his reign . . .305, 306 — , sculptures in his palaces 307 — , Chaldean 313 — , Nabopolassar, his contemporary at Babylon 313 Ashur-bel-kala, King of Assyria q6, 204 — , son of Tiglathpileser I 204 — , married the daughter of Adad- aplu-iddin 204 — , received a large dowry 204 Ashur-bel-nisheshu, King of Assyria . . 77 Ashurdan I., King of Assyria. ..92, 95, 197, 19S — J contemporary of Zamama-shum- iddin 197 — , made war on Babylonia 92 Ashurdan 11., King of Assyria . . 205 », 209 — , "King of the World" 210 Ashurdan III.. King of Assyria . . . 108 234 ■ — , his exploits 108 — , marched into Syria twice 234 — , and into Babylonia against the Chaldeans ^ 234 — , lost his power and influence in the Kingdom _ :■--.• ^34 Ashur-danin-pal, made insurrection in Babylonia ^ 106 — , son of Marduk-nadin-shum 106 Ashur-danin-pal made insurrection m Assyria 227 ■ — , son of Shalmaneser II 227 — , was "Kingof Ashur" 227 Ashur-etil-ili, reigned after Ashur-bani- pal 282 — , reigned with his brother Sin-shar- ishkun 282 Ashur-irbi, King of Assyria 205, 208 — , his statue "in the land of Atalur ".205 n. Ashur-irbi, was suzerain of Nabopolas- sar 313 Ashur-nadin-akhi, King of Assyria. .89, 189 — , contemporary of Buma-Buriash n.. 89 — , was dethroned 92 — , wrote to Amenophis III 189 Ashur-nadin-shum, King of Babylon.. 119 — , son of Sennacherib II 119, 259 — , was made prisoner and deported to Elam iig, 120, 2S9 — , is lost to view 120 Ashumatsirpal I., King of Assyria.104, 112, 139. 195. 196, 210, 219, 288 — , reigned under Shalmaneser II. . 105, 290 — , marched into Armenia . . . 192, 288, 290 — , his date 192 — , son of Tukulti-Ninib II 211 — , his changes and expeditions.211 sq., 218 — , invaded the Nairi Lands . .214-215, 239 — , founded colony at Lukhuti 215, 239 — , his westward march 215, 216 — , passed Syria 216 — , his palace at Caleb 30a — , followed the rdle of Tiglathpileser I 215, 216, 217, 224 — , established Assyrian supremacy. . . 217, 218, 224 Ashur-natsir-pal II., King of Assyria., 205 — , son of Shamshi-Adad 205 — , name found in a hymn 205 Ashur-nirari. I, King of Assyria 196 — , brother Nabu-fdayan] 196 Ashur-nirari. II, King of Assyria.211 «., 235 — , succeeded Adad-nirari IV 235 — , made Ashur his residence 235 — , was probably guided by the priest- hood 235. 236 Ashur-resh-ishi, King of Assyria . . .95, 198 Ashur-rish-ishi, King of Assyria 198, 209 — , contemporary and rival of Nebu- chadrezzar I 198 — , reconquered Mesopotamia 198 — , his inscriptions 198 Ashur-rim-nishi-shu, earliest King of Assyria 180, 188 — , contemporary with Kara-indash of Babylon 180 Ashur-ubalUt, King of Assyria. :8i, 82, 85, 90, 189, 196 — , contemporary of Amenophis IV — 184 — , grandson of Ashur-nadin-akhi 189 — , his diplomacy 189, 190, 191. 196 — , recognised by Egypt . 190 — , victory over the Mitani 190 — , gained Nineveh 190 — , first Assyrian ' ' King of the World " 190, 196 — , contended with the Suti 217 Asia Minor, the home of the Hittite script 6, 200 — , in popular migrations 7, 8, 200, 249 — , its position in war. . .217, 249, 259, 260, 267. 284 332 INDEX Asia Minor, a barrier between East and West of the Euphrates agi Asia, Western 236, 260, 287 — , dependent on the Medes 319 Askalon under Assyrian control 241 Assyria proper, its definition 177 — , its dominions 31.47. 67, 83 — , its wars 35, 47,49, 82, 91, 128^17. — , its relation to Babylon. .62, 65, 66, 67, 75 sg., 82, 83, 86. gi, 92, 93, 9855., 130, 140, 167 sq., 171, 176, 182, 185, 303, 304 — , its relation to Elam 85, 86, 98, gg, 277 sg. — , Its relation to Mesopotamia 87. 88, 167 sg., 170, 171, 176, 286 sg., 303 — , in relation to the Chaldeans . 100 sg. — , its fall 103, 269 — , divided into North and South 105 — , its national policy. 105 sg., 171, 183, 184, 268, 269 — , names of kings lost 108, 180 — , captured and demolished Babylon. 122 — , i.s policies and objects. . . 124-26, 183, 184, 268, 269 — , its monuments and inscriptions. 127 sg., 140, 163, 302 sg. — , our earliest knowledge of . . 128 sg., 165, 303 — , its civilization from the Sumerians.. 130 — , copying Babylonian building 140, 303 sg. — , many industrial remams 163 — , pre-Assyrian.178, 179, 2S6 sg., 303, 304 — , its points of weakness 184, 205 sg. ■ — , its kings 180 sg. — , its racial type i8r — , its force of character 181, 182 — , its natural strength 183 ^7. — , passed from patesis to kings . . . 183, 184 — , depended on its army 183, 184, 269, 288, 298 — , had its mercenaries . . 184, 269, 288, 2g8 — , as a Kingdom 183, 184, 185 — .dependent on Babylonia. . 185, 186, 196 — , rise of the Old Empire 188 — , had superfluous population. .192, 287, 288 — , settled colonies 192, 201, 287 sg. — , jealousy of Babylonia 195, 196, 197, 209, 286, 287 — , reduced to "The Land of Ashur".- 204 — , its kings became "Kings of the World " 209 — , refused to be led by the Axamaeans. 210, 288 — , colonized in the north by Shalman- eser I 211 — , colonies retaken by Tiglathpileser. 211 — , tactics as against the Aramaeans. . . 211, 212, 213, 288 — , J^ehu asked its help 221 — , m dispute with Urartu 225 — , eflectof Shalmaneserll's wars.226, 227 — , as against Damascus 227, 228 — , lost the Nairi Lands to Armenia. . 233 ■ — , lost North Syria 233 — , became the ruling power in West- em Asia 237 sg., 289 — , subjected Damascus and Palestine, 237 sg. — , rule m Syria established 239 — , feeling of its tributary countries. . . 341, 242, 2QI SQ. Assyria proper, country powerless be- cause priest-ridden 244, 289 — , contending parties in 244, 245, 269 — , lost its agricultural class. .246, 269, 288, 301 — , retained only large estates and temples 246, 289 — , its army made up of mercenaries. . 246, 269, 288, 289 — , powerful league against 247 — , Its loss in the weakness of its neigh- bors 251, 252 — , had to meet the Indo-Germanic hordes 252 — , reduced Ashdod to be an Assyrian colony 253 — , lonians favored 256 — , meets the barbarian on equal terms 268 — , conquered Egypt and spoiled it.270, 271 — , on the defensive against Elam . 277 — , helped tlie advance of the Indo- Germanic tribes 279 — , its fall 281 sq., 297, 298 — , was in alliance with Ashkuza 282 — , remained with the Medes 284 — , as a Kingdom it disappeared from history 284, 285 — , its locations and other conditions. . 286 — , was extended to the Euphrates 290 — , how it dealt with the nomads.. .291, 292 — , its vassalages and suzerainty 291 sg. — , its plan of deporting p>opulations.294 sg. — , its principle in exchanging popula- tions 295 -^, its relation toward conquered prov- inces 296, 2 97 — ; its former imperial system changed and lost 297 sq. — , its army organization and arms. . 298 sg. — , its besieging equipment 390 — , its archi^Jure and sculpture 302 — , its tomj^M. 302 — , its a^^?W 303 sg. — , art from Mesopotamia 303 — , built as the Babylonians did . ..303, 304 Assyrian Empire, The Old 188 sg. — . its rise 188 — , " Synchronous History *' 188 — , colonies in Armenia 192 — , power on the decline 368 — , army marched through the Zagros passes to Susa 278 — , its extension beyond the Euphrates 290 — , primarily destroyed by the Medes. . 314 Assyrian-Eponym Canon 143 Assyrian; type of race 181 — , its definition 181, 182 — , if Semitic or Jewish 182 — , its superior character 182, 183 — , military insurrection 195 — , military party 244, 245 — , civilization 287, 303 — , military organization 298 sg. — , excavations and their value 301 sg. Assyrians consult the oracle 268 Assyriology, as a historical study. ..125 sq., . 142, 143 Astrology early found in Babylonia . . . 143 — , based on astronomy 149 sg. Astronomical cycles 33 — , studies begun in Babylonia 143 sq. — , as related to Religion 146 sq. Astronomy, related to religion 146 sg. INDEX 333 As^ftnomy, to the Babylonian it was the science of sciences 148 Astyages. successor of Cyaxares 283 —.defeated by Cyrus 322 Athens, the Greek . i S3 Atalur, the land of 205 n. Az • 34«.,4i — , Its patesi was killed 34 «. Azaz was conquered 215 — , sufiered from Adad-Nirari III 229 Azil, native sheikh and governor 212 Azriya'u, prince of Ya'udi, in revolt. . . 230, 240 — , was not the Scripture Azariah or Uzziab 239 n. B Ba'al, King of Tyre 265 — , submitted to Assyria 276 — , had the island of Tyre 276 Ba'al-Harran, the god of Harran 169 Babel, the tower of 141 — , related to E-saggil in Babylon . 141 Babilu, the holy city of Marduk 61 Babylon, first dynasty of 56 sq., 78, 152, . 153. 155, 176 — , Its history begms 58, 1 53 — , second period of its history 60 sq. — , its influence as a world power. . .61 sq., 78. 153 '—, second dynasty of 66 sq. — , its list of kings 66 55. — , third dynasty of 71 sq. — , its language 79 — , its cuneiform script 79 — , presents to Egypt 79. 80 — , presents from Egypt 79, 80, 16 1 — , light thrown on the country's con- dition 80, 83, 98 — , Karduniash the Kassite name of 85 — , opposed by Assyria and Elam. . .86, 91, 98, 176 — , list of Kassite dynasty..-.. 7P ^ff- — , conquered by Tukulti-Ninib 91 — , Pa-she dynasty 93 sq., 197 — , Bazi dynasty 98 — , Sumuabi dynasty 154 — , Khammurabi dynasty 154 — , at peace xinder the Assyrian pro- tection 114 — , Chronicle 120, 122 — , under Elamite protection . 122 — , was demolished by Sennacherib 122, . 257 — , was rebuil t on the old hnes 123 — , was ruled under Assyrian suzer- ainty 124 ^, had sacrifices offered by the Assyr- ian King 124 — , its political complications stated, 126, 153 — , earliest knowledge of 128 sq., 153, 124, 177 sq. — .itsMarduk-cult 24, 152, 153, 154 — , in its earliest light 153 — , its foundation iS3 — , its later history 153. i77 ^Q- — , its greatness accounted for 253 — , its creation-myth 153, 154 — ," the Kingdom of Babylon" 177 — , its natural weakness 183 — , superior to Assyria 209, 229 Babylon, but Assyria becomes the stronger 209, 239 — , intriguing against Assyria . . . .221, 213 — , of Nebuchadrezzar was Chaldean. 249 — , was occupied by Sargon II 2 53 — , fell before Sennacherib 122, 257 — , made tlie capital by Esarhaddon. . . 262 — , was destroyed 262 — , all that remained to Nabopolassar. 313 — , recovered her power and dominion. 315, , . 316 — , was rebuilt by Nebuchadrezar II 316 — , besieged and taken by Cyrus 325 — , became a Persian province. . . .327, 328 Babylonia, influence of its civilization. 3, 5, , 32, 49, 53. 67, 71, 130, 284 — , itsmfluence on Greece 3, 130, 155 — , its expansion of western history. .4, 60, . . ^ 62, 82, 155, 303, 319 — , Its mfluence on other lands. . s, 6, 49,60, }^^sq.,3i9 — , mfluence of its cuneiform writmg. .6, 62 — , as a centre in migrations 7, 8, 35, 36, 59 jff.,67, 71 sq., 130 — , as a Semitic centre, 9. 31, 35,60, 63, 206 — , had its culture from the Sumerians. 12, 35. 55. 66, 130, 260, 303 — , its earliest life unknown. .17, 34, 36, 53, 56, 130 — , the city of Marduk 24 — , principal cities of 22 sq. — , Its high state of cultivation. . 26, 32, 34, , 36, 49. 60, 62, 63, 64, 65, 130, 260, 303 — , its political expansion. . . .31, 34, 35, 36, 54, 62, 66 sq., 161, 170, 319 — , its influence in 3000 B. C..49, 60, 62, 64 — , was ruled from Ur 51 — , its first dynasty 53, 56 sq. — , opposed by Elam 54, 55 — , its post-Sumerian period 55 sq* — , its king-list 58 sq., 66 sq. — , its decadence 63, 66 55. — , as a World Power 66 sq., 319 — , held by Chaldeans 68, 100 sq. — , held by tiie Kassites..7i sq., 73 sq., 160, 173, 180, 207 — , in opposition to Assyria 75 sq., 91, 100 sq., 160, 171 — , Semitic immigration 206 sq, — , the dynasty of Pa-She 93 sq. — , the dynasty of Bazi gSsq* — , under the suzerainty of Ashur or Elam 106 — , opposed by Chaldea and Assyria . . 107 — , fell into the hands of the Chald- eans 109 — , under the new Assyrian Empire. 113 sq. — , xmder Sargon II as its Governor 116, 117 — , under Assyrian suzerainty .... 124, 161 — , at last was Chaldean 126 — , destroyed by the Mongols 138 — , its fertility 13S «., 161 — , not congenial for the Arts 139 sq. — , used brick for buildings. . 140, 142, 303, 304 — , mother of the sciences 142 sq. — , as related to religion 146 sq., 155 — , her rehgion was Astral. . . 146, 147, 148, 149 — , commercial country 1380., 161, 170 — , policy in commerce 161 sq. ■ — , left few industrial remains 163 — , policy in politics 170 — , jealous of Assyria 195, 196 334 INDEX Babylonia, yielded to Assyria 197 ^?- — , occupied by the Suti 207 — , influenced by the Chaldeans 210 — , how it felt the wars of Shalmaneser 11 226, 227 — , revolts under Shamash-shum-ukin. 279 — , remained to Babylon 284 — , excavations in 301, 302 — , connected with the west of the Eu- phrates -,-303. 319 — , its relation to Syria and Palestine . . 303 — , its existence depending on the Medes 319 — , entirely exhausted under Nabu- na'id 320 sq. —, South 325 Babylonian Art 164 — , building with brick 139 sq., 303. 3^4 — , chronicle 122, 260 »., 273 — , creation myths iS3. '^55 — , excavations few 301, 303 — , exports 161, 162, 163 — , hierarchical party 245 — , influence on intellectual life . ... 155 sq. — , influence on Judaism 155-158 — , inscriptions 6, 10, 164, 282, 284 — , Kingdom 27 sq., 56 sq., 77 sq. — , literature 282 — , myths 79i 153 — , Semites 21, 27 sq., 55, 100 55. — , stepped pyramids 141 Bagdad as a power 61 — , dealer in antiquities lyBn. Bahrein, an island 48 Balaam 201 Balikh, river 25, 78, 218, 286 Bara'se 39 Bar-khaya, son of Khayna 2 1 9 n. Bartatua, King of Ashkuza 268, 283 — , married the daughter of Esarhad- don 268 Ba'sa (Baasha) of Ammon 220 Bau, the goddess 46 Bau-akhi-iddin. King of Babylon.. 107, 112 — , contemporary of Shalmaneser 107 — , his acts 107 — , made prisoner by tlie Assyrians . . . 107 Bavian, regions of 139 Bazi, dynasty of 98 — , locaUty of 98 Bedouin of the Steppes 191 — , settled in Syria 213 • — , were punished by Ashur-bani-pal. . 279, 280 Being, the Divine 146 — , symbolized by the visible forms 146, 147 «. — , as shown in eastern theology. . 146, 147, 148, 151 Beirut 199, 222, 256 — , Shelmaneser II, sculptured his image at 222 Bel the god of Nippur. ... 89, 137, 151, 154 — , of the Babylonians 316 Belit, the god of Nippur 85 Bel-ibni, King of Babylon 118 — , had to change the national policy . - 118 — , forsook Assyria for Elam 118 — , joined Elam, but was defeated .... 119 — , returned to Nineveh 119 Bel-kudur-utsur, King of Assyria .... 197 — , fell in battle 197 Bel-limiu-anni, limmuol , 121 n. Bel-Matate 88 Bel-Nadin-Apli, King of Babylon gS Bel-Merodach, his temple in Babylon. 141 Bel-nadin-shum I, king of Babylon. . . 91 — , his contemporaries 9I1 92 — , was dethroned 92 Bel-nirari, King of Assyria 89, 90 • — , contemporary of Kurigalzu II. . . 90, 191 — , succeeded Ashur-uballit 191 — , defeated Kurigalzu 191 Bel-shar-utsur, son of Nabima'id .... 325 — , the Scripture, Belshazzar 325 — , placed on his father's throne 325 Bel-shum-iddin (Bel-nadin-shum I). .91 »• Bel-tartsi-ilu-ma, governor in Assy- ria 230 — , waslitnmu 231 n. — , presented the statues of Nebo 231 — , taught Monotheism 231 Berlin Museum 169 Berosus, Babylonian historiographer. . loi, 111 • — , his date m — , gives an unfavorable account of Amel-Marduk 320 — , priest of Bel 320 — , wrote in the Seleucid period 320 Berossus 260 n., 320 Bibe-yashi (Gu-yashi), King of As- syria 88 Bir-idri of Damascus 219 — , properly Benhadad 219 n. — , died 221 Bishri, Mount 201 Bit-Adini, Chaldean Kingdom. . . 102, 170, 214 — , Bit-Adini in 201 — , Aramaean state 2 10, 2 1 1 — , near Harran 211 — , conquestby Ashur-Natsir-palI.2ii, 214 Bit-Agusi (or Bit-Gusi) 2 10 n. — , its relation to Arpad 2 10 n. Bit-Amukkani, Chaldean Kingdom.. . 102 Bit-Dakuri, Chaldean Kingdom. .102, 109, 123, 210, 262 — , near Babylon 210 — , how treated by Esarhaddon 262 — , had taken possession of territory.. . 262 ^, the king was deposed 262 Bitiliashu, King of Babylon 91, 193 — , son of Shagarakti-Shuriash 91 — , name forms gin. — , made prisoner 193 Bit-khadippi on the lower Khabur . . 211, 212 — , Sura, its chief city 212 Bit-Khamban 226 Bit-Khilani, Chaldean Kingdom 102 Bit-Sa'alli, Chaldean Kingdom 102 Bit-Yakin, the "Sea-Land" 102 Bit-Zamani, the city 260 ». Boghaz-kbi, Hittite capital 74 Bondage in the East 134 Borsippa 102, 1 13 — , sister city of Babylon log — , accountof a tumultat. . ..109, no, 113 — , taken possession of by the Bit-Da- kuri 262 Bukhia, King of Lulubl 178 — , son of Asiri 178 — , " King of the Land Khurshiti" . . . 178 Buriash (Lord of Lands) 88 Burnaburiashl., King of Babylon ..78, 79, 8i, 82, 89, 189, 194, 203 — ."servaatof the Lord of Lords" ... 88 INDEX 335 Buniabunash I., contemporary of Amenophis III 89, 203 — , contemporary of Buzur-Ashur 189 Burna-Bunash II., King of Babylon— 89 — , son of Kurigalzu I 89 — , correspondent of Amenophis IV.89, 189 — , contemporary of Ashur-nadin-akhi of Assyria gp — , gave daughter to Kara-Indasli 11. [ 89 Bur-sin, King of Isin 53 Buzur-Ashur, King of Assyria 189 — , contemporary of Buma-buriash I.. 189 Caleb (Nimmd) 25 Calendar changed by Nabu-natsir.iii, 112 _ . ISO n. — , effect of its reform in the East. . 112, 150 — , borrowed by Greece and Rome from Babylonia 144 Caliphs of Bagdad 57 — , of the Buyids 57 Canaan as a country 199 — , its possession an object. 199 Canaanite, a people in Western Asia. . 21, 35. 36. 37. 53, 59 sg., 75, 82, 152 — , use of the word explained 59, 6i, 75 — , national policy 82 — , as a remnant 150, 152, 182 — , their characteristics 182 — , immigration 206 Canaanitic-Hebraic (Amorite) migra- tion 21, 35, 36. 59, 152, iSi. 182 Canals, their economic importance. . 136 sq. — , built by kings and public bene- factors 137 sg. — , famous canals named 137 — , their need for attention 138 — , different uses in Babylonia and As- syria 138, 139 Cappadocia 48, 171, 173, 275 — , Babylonian tablets found at . . .171, 192 — , under Assyrian influence 171, 267 — , imder Esarhaddon 267 Carchemish (Karchemish) — 201, 215, 239 — , Hittite capital 215 — , paid tribute 240 Carmel, Mount 199 Carthage (Kition) 2 56 Caspian Sea 268 Cavalry and war-chariots 298 sg. Central Asia, in migrations 7,8 Chaldea and South Babylonia 105 — , its national policy 107 — , attacked by Ashurdan III 108 — , overthrew Babylon 109 — » assisting Babylon against Senna- cherib 122 — , meeting the Aramean immigration 207 Chaldean tribes holding in Babylonia. 68, 99 sg. — , their immigration — 99. 100, loi, 126, 207, 249 — , have Babylonian language and names ',""•.* ^°° — , were Semites from Eastern Arabia loi — , got the power in Babylon. 102 sq., 126, — , in tumult at Borsippa 109, no — , in union with Elam 116 sg., 162 ^ trouble the Babylonian boundaries 123 — \ connections with Babylon. 125, 126, 315 , traded by the Persian Gulf 162 Chaldean tribes in Babylonia 208 — , revolting in Babylon 262 ■ — , their character illustrated 262, 315 Chaldeans, reputed masters in astrol- ogy 143 • — , attacked m Babylonia by Ashur- dan III 234 Chinzer (Ukin-zir) 114 Chronological reckonings 144 — , whole system due to Babylonia . , . 145 — , succession of the kings 38-40 Cilicia 171, 173, 174,224,257,275 — , Southeastern 220 — , under Esarhaddon 267 Cimmerians (Gimmirai) 241 — , [see Kimmerians] Civilization, its course and direction. . 67, 130 sq., ISO — , Its ongm imtraceable 130, 150 — , its development in the Euphrates valley.. 131 sq., 150 Coele-Syria 219, 223 Commageue (Kummukh) 238 — , paid tribute 238 Commerce in Babylonia 160 sg. — , on the Mediterranean i6i Creation myths 153, 154 — , in Babylon 154 — , their relation to the Bible 155 Crimea 241 w, Cuneiform writing, an intellectual medium 6, 31, 79 — , value of its decipherment 6, 79 — , its origin n — , found at Tel-Amama 79 Cutha (Tel-Ibrahim) 24 — , its god Nergal 152 Cyaxares attacked Nineveh 283 — , the Mede 2S3 — , destroyed Nineveh 283 — , his later influence 319 Cycle, astronomical 33 Cyprus 30, 256 — , Luh fled to 257 Cyrus the Persian 255 — , his astronomical cycle 33 — , drove off the Ummanmanda from Harran 283 — , advanced upon Babylonia 324 — , his siege and capture of Babylon. . . 325 — , engaged his soldiers in draining the Diyala 326 — , diverted the Euphrates from Baby- Ion 326 — , welcomed in Babylon as a deUv- erer... 326,327 — , proclaimed king in Babylon 326 ■ — , returned the gods to their cities 326, 327 — , restored the provinces their free- dom 327, 328 — , brought East and West into fuller contact 328 Dagan, the deity 53 — , Canaanitic 53, 183 Dakuri tribe no Damascus controlled Syria 216 — , controlled by Ashur-natsir-pal I. . . 217, 218 — , Bir-idri of 219 — , controlled by Shalmaneser II 220 — , strong in self-defence 221 336 INDEX Damascus, Hazael ascended the throne 221 — , stood as a defence between Assyria and Palestine 222, 223, 22p, 230, 292 — , as against Assyria 229, 230 — . was attacked by Ashur-dan III 234 — , against Tiglathpileser III 237 — , Tsimirra province given to Shal- maneser 240 — , paid tribute to Tiglathpileser III 240 — , Tiglathpileser III, its feudal lord. . 240 — , revolted -_ 241. 242 — , was besieged by Tiglathpileser III. 242, 300 — , made an Assyrian province 242 — , in league against Assyria — _. 247 — , land plundered from Assyria to. . . 279 Damdarausa, city of the Nairi-Lands. 214 Damiq-Marduk, dynasty of 97 Dam-ki-ili-shu, King of Babylon 69 Daniel, the Book of 255 «. — , Chap. IV 318 Dates of the early migrations 29 jg. — , of the kings 38- 40 David, King of Judah 62, 183, 202, 318 — , question of tiie slaying of Goliath, 318 «. Dayaeni and their oppressors 224, 225 De Sarzec, French consul 23 Deir 24 Deities in Babylonia 150 — , different in North and South Baby- lonia 152 Deity, the ancient landlord 133, 134 — , when revealed as the Sun-god 230 — , Monotheistic worship of 230 Demavend 268 Diarbekr, inscriptions at 30 n. Dilbateans 109 Dihnun 31,48,49, 163 — , the island of Bahrein 163 — , King of 261 Diyala drained by Cyrus' soldiers 326 Djokha 23 n. Du'a in the Taurus range 267 — , visited by Esarhaddon 267 Dungi 36, 45. 46, 8s — , son of Ur-gur of Ur 46, 47, 5 1 ^, his date S^i 85 — , inscriptions 51, 52, 85 Dupliash (Umliash) 72 Dur-ilu 25, 91, 120 — , city laid waste 86, 91 — , its situation 86 — , battle at 116 — , Tcumman was defeated at 278 Dur-Sharrukin (Sargon's City) founded 254 — , palace built by Sargon II 254, 255 — , mscriptions and sculptures at 255 Dushi (Ushshi), King of Babylon .... 89 Dushratta, King of Mitani 172, 190 — , writer of the Tel-Amama letters. . . 172, 173. 174. i75i 176 — , son of Sutama 174 — , grandson of Artatama 174 — , at the court of Amenophis III ... . 174 — .wrote letters to Pharaoh... 175, 176 ■ — , probably had taken Nineveh . .175, 190 — , sent the statue to Egypt 175 Dushulti on the Euphrates 109 Dynasty of Bazi 92 «., 98 — , of Damiq-Marduk 97 — , of Erba-Marduk 116 «. — , of Isin 53 Dynasty of Kassite 68 — , of Khammurabi 154 — , of Pashe (Pa-She) 93 sq-, I97 — , of Shishku 66, 70 — , of Sumuali 154 —, of Tintir (Babylon) 70 — ,ofUr SI Ea, the god 143 «■ E-anna, temple of is — , house of heaven 77 «■ E-anna-duI, patesi of Lagash . . ..34?!., 37 — , his monument "Stele of Vultures"37, 41 — , son of A-kur-gal 41 — , first of the name 41. 42 — , King of Lagash 41 — , genealogical table of 42 n. Ea-gamil, King of Babylon 69 Ea-mukin-Shum, King of Babylon ... 97 East, its history obscure 127 sg., 130 — , value of the monuments and re- mains 127 sg. — , civilization traced from 127 sg., 130 — , defective view of social life 128 sq. Edessa, District of 201 — , Dukedom of 210 Edom, tributary to Adad-Nirari III. . . 229 — , paid tribute to Sennacherib 257 — , lay on the caravan route 266 E-dubar-Shugamuna, King of Babylon 98 Egypt, its influence on Western civil- ization 4, 60 — , its cuneiform inscriptions 4 — , its hieroglyphs 4 ^, decipherment of its inscriptions ... 4 — , its expansion of Western history 4 — , its early life unknown 17 — , artists of its old empire. .37, 80, 139, 140 — . its relation to Babylon 60 sq., 80, 81, 161, I7S — , its Hyksos 60 — , its presents to Babylon 79, 80 — , view of the country 80-82 — , in relation to Assyria 81, 175, 269 — , in relation to Phcenicia 81 — , congenial for the Arts i39sq. — , its relation to Elam 161 — , its commerce 161, 162 — , as against the Hittites 199, 200 — , dealing with Tiglathpileser I 202 — , expected to help a coalition of States 242, 243, 247, 250 — , invaded by Sennacherib 258 — , under Taharqu 264, 265 — , conquered by Esarhaddon 269 — , invaded by Nebuchadrezzar. . .317, 318 Egypt, her desire to hold Palestine . . . 269 — , as " the broken reed " 270 — , twenty-two kings set over by Esar- haddon 271, 272 Ekallati and its statues 203 E-kur-ul-anna, King of Babylon 69 Elam.. .39, 48, 54, 67, 91, 93, 106, 122, 123, 161, 163, 193, 277, 279 — , its place in the ethnic migrations. ..5, 8, 18, 19, 54, 55. 67 — , its relation to Babylonian culture. . 47, 48, 55.67, 85.92, 93,98 — , as opposed to Babylon. .9, 94, 95, 116, 117, 122, 123, 193, 263 — , bordering on Bazi 98 — , its policy in assisting Chaldea.107, 1 16 sq. INDEX 337 EI, am, aa against Assyria 124, 125 —, in relation to Egypt ... . . 161 — . borrowed the gods of Sippar 263 — , bargon s candidate received the throne 254 —, under Urtaki Elam attacked ' As- syria ayy , Babylon's strongest support 279 —, destruction of the Elamite King- aoi" 279, 319 — , the Medes took the place of Elam. . 282, 319 — , fell to Babylonia 284 — , Cyrus at 325 Elamite language was used in writing.. 19 Elamites 85, 140 — , as rulers in Babylon 97 sq. — , as against Assyria . . .121, 122, 123, 319 — , as related to the Babylonians in art 140 — , laid waste Northern Babylonia . . . 259 — , took captive Ashur-nadin-shum 259 — , accounted for their bad luck 263 n. Elhanan of Bethlehem 318 Elisha, the prophet 221 Ellipu bordering on Elam 229 — , its throne contested 254 En-a-kalli, patesi of the "City of the War Chariots 42, 43 En-anna-du I, King of Lagash 42 n. En-anna-du II, King of Lagash . . .42 n., 44 — , son of En-temena 42 «., 44 En-gil-sa, father of Uru-ka-gina 39 Enil, King of Hamath, was dethroned 247 En-shag-kush-an-na 39 En-temena, King of Lagash 42, 43 Epics, Babylonian iS9 -sff- — , collection of 160 Eponym Canon (Assyrian). .210, 228, 229, ™ . . 233. 234. 235 Eponym Chronicle 238 Era, new, introduced by Nabu-natsir. . 1 1 1 Erba-marduk, dynasty of 116 n. — , King of Babylon 109, 1 1 z Erba-Sin of the dynasty of Damiq- Marduk 97 Erech(Ur) 77».,8s — , its gods brought to Babylon 325 — , Nana of 85 — .tablet dedicated at 86 Eridu (Abu Shahrein) 23, 132, 151 — , Uddadu of 53 — , in relation to olden culture 151 E-saggil, temple in Babylon 141 Esarhaddon, King of Assyria 122, 195, 252 — , murdered his father Sennacherib. . 122, 195. 245, 258, 259 — , was first governor of Babylon 123 — , rebuilt Babylon 123 — .depended on the priesthood... 1 2 3, 244, 245 — , his influence in Babylon.. .123, 124, 244 — , favored the party of the cities and temples 244,245 — , succeeded to the throne 260 — , defeated brother and rival for the throne - : " ■ V ' ^^° — , most sympathetic figure m As- syrian history 261 — , his literary inspiration 261 — titles in the inscriptions 261 — , did not enlarge his kingdom 261 — , his titles and designations . . . - . 261, 271 — not ^ble to control his neighbors, . 261-3 Esarhaddon, attacked Tyre 264 — , his monolith not fully accurate 265 — , his attack on Egypt 265 «., 318 — , returned queen and gods to Aribi . . 266 — , in Cilicia and Cappadocia 267 — , reported victories 368 — , made alliance with Ashkuza by marriage 268 — , his expeditions futile. .265, 266, 267, 268 — , he conquered Egypt. 269, 270, 271, 272, 318 — , died on his way to Egypt 272 — , his palace in Caleb 302 Esarhaddon-burg in the new Sidon . . . 264 Ethiopian 271 Etruscans as architects 141, 144 Euphrates river, its effect in protect- ing Babylonia 8, 168, 173, 286 — , its place in early history. .3, 5, 104, 109, 120, 130^3., 168, 171, 173, 200, 201, 213, 214, 249, 286, 315 — , its place in civilization. . .130, 131, 168. 286 — , its valley the home of nations. . . 130 sq., 168, 171, 177, 199, 200, 2or, 286 — , the source of its fertility 131 — , compared with the Nile 131 — , crossed on rafts on sheepskins .... 215 — , and Tigris as rivers 286 Euphrates, the Upper 224, 286 Evil Merodach of Judah (Amel-Mar- duk) 320 Excavations and their results 125 sq. — , in Babylon and Assyria 301, 302 Ezekiel, the prophet 318 Fables, Babylonian 160 G Gabar (Sam'al), Khayna of 219 Galen, indebted to Babylon 123 n. Gal-ka-ni, son of Ur-ningirsu 46 — , father of Khala-lama 46/1. — , patesi of Lagash 46 ». Gambuli, their obedience, how secured 263 — , intrigued with Urtaki of Elam .... 277 — , were chastized by Ashurbanipal for disaffection 279 Gamil-Ninib, King of Isin 53 Gandish (Gaddash, Gande), King of Babylon 88 Gaza in Palestine 247, 323 — , was ^Lttacked-by Hanna._,__..-_^-^~^-248__ — , on tl^caravan route 266, 323 Gebal sent tribute to Ashur-natsir-pal 1 216 — , its locality 240, 256 — , a tributary 240, 2 56 Genesis X. and its genealogies 185?. German excavations in Babylon 301 ■ — , empire in the Middle Ages 319 Giammu, an ArmsEan prince 218 — , his territory annexed to Assyria ... 218 Gild, religious, or sect 144 «• Gilgamish-epic 1 59 — , discovered by Geo. Smith 1 59 « ■ — , its contents i59 Gilukhipa, daughter of Sutarna 174 — , entered the harem of Amenophis III 174 Gilzan, near L?Lke Van , : , ,. .224, 22s, 226 338 INDEX Gilzar, near the Urumia Sea 214 Gimmirai (Cimmerians) 241 Gindibu, the Arabian 220 Gir, an old sign 69 m. Girra, Chaldean war-god loi Girsu 44 Gish-gal, city of the War Chariot 41 Gizilbunda 229 Gobryas (Ugbaru) led the Persians into Babylon 326 Goliath slain by David 318 «. Gomer (Gen. x., 2) 241 Greece, influenced by Babylonia. 3, 30, 31, 130 — , influenced by Egypt 4 — , its place in civilization 13O1 ^53 — , its place in tradition 253, 318 Greek Kings, seven -_- 253 — , wanted assistance from Assyria against the Phoenicians 253 Greeks early in contact with Babylonia 30, 31, 253 — , brought into fuller contact with Persia 327. 328 Gudea, patesi of Lagash.. .32, 34«., 45. 51, 68, 140 — , his statues and monuments. ..45, 49, 63, 140, lOi. 163, 304, 308 — , information from his inscriptions. . 161, 308 — , as a builder 161, 304 Gul, an old sign 69 n. Gul-ki-shar, King of Babylon 69 Gur, measure of grain 43 Gurgum paid tribute to Shalmaneser II 219 — , incorporated in Syria 252 — , subjugated by Sarduris II 238, 239 — , paid tribute 240 Gusi, Arame of 219 Gusi, prince of Yakham 215 — , submitted to Ashur-natsir-pal I . . . 215 Guti 72 Gutium (Kuti) 48 — , (North Countries) 124 — , King of 38, 261 Gu-yashi (Bibe-yashi), King of Assyria 88 Gyges, King of Lydia 275 — , was assisted by Ashur-bani-pal against the Kimmerians 275 — , forgot his obligation and was slain in battle 275, 276 — , had joined Psammetik against the Assyrians 276 H Halys river 200, 223, 249, 250 Hamath in Syria 219, 220, 221, 240 — , paid tribute 240, 247 — , was incorporated in the province of Tsimirra 247 — , was conquered and put under tribute 24S Hammurabi 44, 194 k. — , his code of laws in Susa 63 "Hanging gardens of Semiramis" 317 Hanno of Gaza subimtted to Tiglath- pileser III 247 — , tried to conquer Gaza 248 — , was repulsed at Raphia 248 Harran 23, 173, 210, 283, 303 — , sanctuary of the moon-god — 153, 169, 283, 303, 322 Harm, " Sin," the god of 169 — , remains at 170 — , its strategic position 17I1 173. 210 ~, its culture 178,210 — , stood by Shalmaneser II 227, 303 — , was destroyed by the Median hosts 283 — , was restored 283 — , old sanctuary restored by Shal- maneser II 303 — , old sanctuary restored by Ashur- banipal -^ 303 — , old sanctuary restored by Nabu- na'id 303 — . the Medes at 322 Hauran, the 222 Hazael, King of Syria at Damascus. - . 221, 222 Hazael, his dealing with the Assyrians. 222 — , his city was besieged by Shalman- eser II 222 Hebrews in relation to the migrations. . 2 1 — , occupying Palestine 100 Hebron 170 Heliopolis (On) 274 Hermon, Mount 222 — , Shalmaneser II. at 222 Heracles, as related to Is-tu-bar 159 Hero-myths 158, 159 Herodotus, historian 276, 319, 325 Hezekiah, King of Judah. .82, 247 k., 256, 292 — , resisted Sennacherib 257 — , expected help from the Arabs 257 — , lost many cities to Sennacherib ■ 257 — , his intrigues with Luli of Tyre 256 — , held Padi who favored Assyria 256 Hippocrates indebted to Babylon . . . 143 n. Hiram of Tyre 239 Hittite ideograph inscriptions 74 n. — , Kingdom 199, 249 — , script, home of the 6, 74 n. — , antiquities 170 Hittites, their place in migrations. 8, 48, 74, 75, 172, 173, 174, 198 sg., 206 sq., 249 — , their place in politics 81, 173, 174 — , opposed to the Mitani 174 — , connected with the people of Kum- mukh, Muski and Kaska 198, 249 — , heard of from Egyptian sources ... 199 — , opposed by the Egyptians 199 — , opposed by the Assyrians 200 — , succeeded by the Assyrians 202 Holland defensible by inundation 325 Holvan, passes of 226, 228 Hophra, King of Egypt 82 Horses, used in war 298, 299 — , cavalry as part of an army 299 — , war chariot common 298, 299 Hosea, King of Israel 242 — , succeeded Pckah 242 Hosea, the prophet 292 Hut-el-Amara, its prolific crops 13S I Igur-Kappapu, patesi of Ashur 180 Hi, priest and patesi 43 Immigration, Canaanite 35, 56, 299 — , Chaldean 36, 100 sg. — , Aramaic 75, 206 sq. — , Kassite 71, 206, 299 — , Sumerian 66 — , into Babylon 98, 100 sq. — , its religious deposits 151 INDEX 339 Immigration, Hittite 249, 299 r~' Indo-Germa.ac 249 Indo-Germanic immigration 249 , the hordes advancing toward As- ^yp^ 252, 255, 259 , their movements in Armenia 267 — , their advance helped by Ashur- bani-pal 279 Inscriptions, their historic value 27 sq,, j-a= , , 127^2-, 228, 233, 235, 236 — , aimculty of datmg 33, 34 — . of the Assyrian Kings 128, 228 — .their partial information.. 127, 128, 130, . ■ 235. 236 — y as reiernng to the water supply. 136, 137 — , as relating to religious ideas 146 sq., 233 — , at the temple of Ncbo 230-233 — , of Ashurbanipal 271 — , in Babylonia and Assyria com- pared 305 lonians, first contact with 253 - — , friendly with Assyria and opposed to Phoenicia 256 ■ — , were prevented from landing in Cil- icia 257 Irba-Marduk, the offspring of 68 Irishu, patesi of Ashur 180 Irkhulini, prince of Hamath 219 — , related to Bir-idri of Damascus 219 — , submitted to Shalraaneser II 220 Irqana in Syria 220 Irrigation, its importance in the East ^35 sq. Isaiah, the prophet 239, 270 — , X., 9 239 — , xiv.,4-21 25s . — , XX., 1 253 Ishbigirra, King of Isin 53 Ishkallu of Tabal 267 — , threatened Assyrian possessions. . . 267 Ish-ki-bal, King of Babylon 69 Ishm^-Dagan ("Dagan heard") 53 Ishmi-Dagan, patesi of Ashur i8q Ishtar, goddess.. 151, 154. i79i 275, 276, 309 — , rivals in North and South 152 — , her statue at Nineveh 175, 179 — , correspondence regarding 175 — , large statue of 309 Ishtar-Nana, city 159 Ishupri, battle fought at 270 Ispabara got the throne of Ellipi 252 — , had the help of Sargon II 254 — , brother of Nibe his competitor 254 Ispuinis, King of Urartu 228 — , son of Sarduris I 228 — , by Shamshi-Adad was called Ush- pina. 228 Israel, Ahab of 220 — , its prophets 221 — , defended from Assyria by Damas- cus 222,223 . — , tributary to Adad-Nirari III 229 — , depressed at news from Syria 239 — , Menahem, king, paid tribute 240 — had peace for ten or more years 242 — became subject to an Assyrian provmce. . 242 — why it fell into captivity 324 Is-tu-bar, hero of the Gilgamish Epic. 159 — , supposed to be Nimrod 159 Izdubar Epic 1 59 «• Isin (Nisin, Paske) 24 — , kings of 53. 57 Isin, dynasty of 53 — , spoiled 91 — , in relation to older cultur« 151 Islam, its i)lace in migrations 21,61 Islamism, its place in civilization . .9, 49, 61 Israel in religious thought 147 «. — , how her fate was sealed 223 — , her relations to Syria and As- syria 222-3, 292 — , questions of national pohcy 292 Italy in the Middle Ages 319 Ithobal made king of Sidon 257 — , succeeded Abd-milkot 264 Javan, ships from 163 n. Jehu, King of Israel 221 — , asked help from Assyria 221 — , gave Shalmeneser 11. the oath of allegiance 222 Jensen, Prof 74 Jeremiah, the prophet 294 Jerusalem 242 — , not reached by Sennacherib. . . .257, 259 — , ruled by Necho II 315 Jonah preaching at Nineveh 232 Joscelin of Tell-Bashir 201 Josiah fell at Megiddo 314 Judah was defended from Assyria by Damascus 222, 223 — , had depressing news from Syria . . . 239 — , was not reached by Sennacherib . . 257 — , showed life though Assyria fell 285 — , studying questions of policy 292 — , why it fell into captivity 324 — , had freedom restored by Cyrus ... 327 — , vacillation of her last kings 293 Judaism as a tribal organization 144 «. — .influenced by Babylonian thought. 155, 156,157 — , how it conceived the idea of a de- liverer 158 Jupiter in Babylonian astronomy .... 148 — , the planet of Marduk 148 K Kadashman-Buriash, King of Baby- lon 90 — , at war with Shalmaneser I 90 Ka-Dashman-Bel, King of Babylon. 79, 89 — , has correspondence with Ameno- phis III 89 — , dedicated a wagon to Bel of Nippur 89 Kadashman-buriash, King of Nippur . 88 ». 193 — , "my protection is the Lord of Lands" 88 «. Kadashman-Kharbe I., King of Baby- lon 82, 83, 84, 90, 98, 190, 193 — , also called Kara-Khardash 82 «. — , his national policy 83, 90 — , was against the Assyrians . . .83, 90, 193 — , his death 84, 90, 190 — , son of Karaindash II 90, 190 — , opened a road through the Syrian desert go Kadashman-Kharbe II, King of Baby- lon 91, 207 — , ruled under the Assyrian Tukulti- Ninib 91, 194 — , prepared for commerce 161 — , met the Suti immigration 207 310 INDEX Kadashman-Turgu, King of Babylon . 90 — , contemporary of Shalmaneser I 90 — , also of Adad-nirari 1 90 — , expelled the Mitani from Mesopo- tamia 90 KalaShergat 177, 180 «. Kaleh-Shergat 191 «• Kalah Shergat 228 n. Kaldi, Babylonian Aramasan tribes. . . 106 Kalkhi, city in Assyria 139, 222, 325 — , founded by Shalmaneser I , ...193,217 — , modem Nimrud i93 — , its situation 193, 325 - — , Ashur-Nitsar-pal I. moved the cap- ital to 217 — , Hazael's diplomats at 222 — , stood stedf ast to Shelmaneser 11 . . 227 — , was chosen again as capital 234 — , capital removed from, to Khorsa- bad 254 Kalludush, King of Elam 120 — , his expedition into North Baby- lonia . 120 — , took Ashur-nadin-shum prisoner . . 120 — , gave a king to Babylon 120 Kalparunda of Patin 219 Kalummu, son of Khazna 219 n. Karamanu, represented Mutsri 252 — , wa3 reduced to an Assyrian prov- ince 252 — , was invaded by Sennacherib 257 — , was founded by Sargon 257 Kandalanu, name of Ashurbanipal in Babylonia 115, 125 — , assumed the crown and authority .. 125 Karaindash, King of Kashshu 73 Karaindash I., King of Babylonia. .77,89, 1 88 — , corresponded with the King of Egypt 77189 — , had alliance with Assyria 89, 188 — , made agreement with Ashur-rira- nishi-shu 188 Karaindash 11., King of Babylon ... 82, 89 — , married daughter of Ashur-mubal- lit 89, 190 — , his contemporaries 89 — , his son Kadashman-kharbe 190 Karan, the river Ulai 120 Kara-su , western portion of the Am(^ . . 215 Karchemish (Carchemish), paid trib- ute 250, 240 — , fell 250 — , advance power of the Khatti 250 — , her kings called "kings of Khatti '*. 250 — , made an Assyrian province. . . . 250, 251 — , held by NechoII 315 Kar-duniash (kingdom of Babylon) .61,85 — , King of 85 — , Kassite name of Babylon 85 Karkar near Hamath 220 Kar-Tukulti-Ninib 195 — , its situation 195 Kasku 240 Kashshu 72. 77 n., 255, 256 — , remnant of the old Kassites 256 Kaska, people of 199 Kashshu-nadin-akhe, King of Babylon 97 Kassite Dynasty. .68, 69 «., 73, 75, 76, 81, 86, 87, 88 sq., 94, 95, 98 — , its origin and history. .71 sq., 87, 90, 93, 98, 206, 356 — , list of thirty-six kings. .88 sq., 92, 93, p8 — .deities .97». Kassite Dynasty, masters of Babylonia, 180, 299 — , immigration 206, 249, 256, 299 Kate, King of Tarsus, dethroned 223 — , brother of Kirri 223 Kengi, King of 39 — , Sumer or South Babylonia 39 Kerkuk east of the river Zab 178 Khabini of Tel-abnaya 213 Khabur 25, 286 — , river and valley 169, 170, 286 Khabur, the Lower 211 Khala-lama, grandson of Ur-ningirsu . 46 Khalman (Aleppo) visited by Shal- maneser II 219 Khalub, battle near 121 Khammu-Rabi, King of Babylon. . . 59, 62, 73,137 — , ancient empire of 62, 73, 137 — , ancient laws 64 — , dynasty of 88 — , his public beneficence 137 — , canal builder 137 — , his time 180 — , his dominions 180 Khani, land of 73, 74, i'73 Khanigalbat, country of . 74, 173, 192, 198, 200 — , Meiitene 173, 201 Kharkhar . ._ 226, 229 Khatarikka in Syria 234 — , attacked by Ashur-dan III 234 Khatti (Hittites) 48,74.215 ■ — , "land of the Khatti" 215, 249, 267 — , Sangara, King of 215 — , kingdom of, became an Assyrian province 251 — , King of 261 Khatti-lam, King of 261 Khayna of Gabar 219 Kheta (Hittites) 174, 175 Kheta-sar, a Hittite king 190, 203 — , connected with Ramses 199,203 — , kingdom 240 Khindanu, half-nomadic state 212 — , at the mouth of the Khabur 212 Khilakku in Cappadocia attacked by Sennacherib 259 Khorsabad north of Nineveh 254 — , Sargon II. built his palace at 254 Khosr, a river in Assyria 139 Khubuskia at the Urumia Sea 214 Khulai, governor of Kinabu 214 — , his skin nailed to the walls of Dam- damusa 214 Khumba-khaldash of Elam 263 — , did not receive Nabu-zer-kitti- iishir 263 — , wrought havoc in North Babylonia, 263 — , remamed hostile to Esarhaddon . . 263 Khumbanigash, King of Elam 116 — , defeated at Dur-ilu 116 Khupushkia 224, 225, 226 Khurbatila, King of Elam 85, go Khurshiti, the land of 178 Kiakki, prince of Tubal 248 ■ — , carried off captive 248 — , his kingdom given to Matt! of Atun, 248 Ki-an-ni-bi, King of Babylon 69 Kidin-khutrutash,Kingof Elam . 86, 92 n., 94 — , his conquests 86, 87, 91, 94, 95 Kimmerians (Cimmereans) rivals to Urartu 252 INDEX 341 Kimmerians (Cimmerians) threaten Assynan territory 255 — , disturbed the Khatti-land 267 — , oppressed the Lydians 275, 276 — , were defeated by Gyges 275 Kinabu, city in the Nairi-Lands 214 Kmalia (Kunalua) 239 King, as feudal landlord 133, 134 — , landlord under the deity 134 — , as a living force in the ancient king- doms 230 "King of the Kings of Mutsur," title of Esarhaddon 271 " King of the Kings of Paturisi" 271 Kings of Anzan and Suri 284 — , of Assyria 78. 209 — , of Assyria as " Kings of the World " 20 — , of Babylon 78 — , of Isin 53i 88 — , of Isin and Larsa , 88 — , of Kashshu 73 — , of Khatti 250 — . of Mitani 78 — , of Shuraer and Akkad 47, 52, 53, 57, 58. 77 n-. 113. 203 — , of the "Four Quarters of the World" 47.52. 58,73. io4. 105, 113 — , of the Hittites 78 — , of the Sea-Lands 207 — , of the World. 47, 168, 196, 197,203, 209, 382 Kingdom of Babylon 177 — , of Khammurabi 73 — , of Sumer and Akkad 51. 52 Kir-gal-dara-bar, King of Babylon ... 69 Kirkhi 226 Kirri, made king in Tarsus 223 ^, brother to Kate 223 Kish (Uhaimir ?) 24, 34, 39 ;— , inscriptions at 28, 38 — , the kings of 34. 38, 39. 40 — , battle at 117 Kition (Carthage) 256 Kudur-Bel, King of Babylon . . ..90, 194 n. — , father of Shag-ash alti-buriash . . .194 «. Kudur-Mabuk the Elamite 54 Kudur-nakhimdi, son of the King of Elam 92 — , wasted Babylonia 92 Kue (Southeastern Cilicia) 220 — , tributary to Damascus 223 — , conquered by Shalmaneser II 223 — , the prince of 238 — , paid tribute to 240 — , mcorporated in Syria 252 — , tried to check the forays of Mita. . . 353 KuUani, city of Azriya'u 239 Kumani tribe 202 Kummukh, people of . . . 173. 198, 200, 238 —, the place 212,238 — , Kimdaspi of 219 — , Kustaspi of 238 Kummukh (Commagene) 238 — , paid tribute to Sarduris II 238 — , paid tribute to Tiglathpileser III. . 240 — , reduced to an Assyrian province . . 252 Kunalua (Kinalia) 239 Kundaspi of Kummukh 219 Kundiin Cilicia .... .. .. - .- ■ 264 — , perhaps the old Kyhida, and later Anchiale 264 «. Kurigalzu I., King of Babylon 81, 89 has relations with Amenophis in 89 Kurigalzu I., and with Assyria 89 Kurigalzu II., King of Babylon. .84, 85, 86 190, iQi, 278 — , his tablet 85, 86 — , son of Kadashman-kharbe go, 190 — , his succession to the throne 90, 190 — , his wars and contemporaries . . . 90, 190, 278 — , great-grandson of Ashur-uballit.90, 190 Kush (Nubia) 271 Kushites driven out of Egypt 199, 200 Kut-el-Amara near Babylon 138 — , modem Shatt-el-Hai 138 n. Kustaspi of Kummukh paid tribute . . 338 Kutha as protector of Babylonian deities 124, 125 "Kuti," territory of 48 Kutians in the North 198 Kutur-nakhunde 92 «. Kuyunjik, excavations at 302 Kyinda (Kundi) 264 ». Labashi-Marduk, King of Babylonia . 321 — , son and successor of Amel-Marduk, 321 — , chose a Babylonian successor 321 Lagash, kings of 13, 34, 37, 41 sq., 49 — , patesisof..32,36, 37, 39, 4i ^?-. 51. 163 — , its ancient buildings 141, 150, 163 — , numerous remains 163, 308 Lagash (or Sir-pur-la) 23, 132, 150 — , inscriptions at . . 28, 32, 37, 49, 132, 150 — , sculptures and writing of . . ..36, 37, 49, 132, 163,308 — , decline of culture in 37, 150 — , loses its independence 41, 42, 150 — , (Telloh) 4S, 141, 150. 163 — , flourishing 45 — , as a center of civilization ..132, 150,308 Laid, half -nomadic State 212 Lallas of Malatia 225 Lalli of Mitilene 219 — , paid tribute to Ashur-Natsir-pal I. 219 Land, its tenure 131 sg., 286 sq. — , agriculture in the Euphrates valley 131 sq., 286 sq, — , agriculture in the Nile valley. . . . 131 sq. — , its laws derived from the Sumer- ians 133 — , carried down its own conditions. .. 132, 133, 286 sq. — , earliest system clerico-feudal. . 133-135, 288, 289 — , vassalage and suzerainty 291 " Land of Ashur " 204 Larsa (Senkereh) .... 24, 34 n., 40, 56, 132 — , the dynasty of 54 sq., 56, 57 — , as a centre of civilization 132, 151 — , its deity 151, 152 — , sun-temple in 194 «■ Layard, Sir Austen H 169, 217 — , unearthed the palace of Shalma- neser I. at Kalkhi 217 Lebanon 34 "• . 140 — ; cedar from 304 Libit- Anunit, King of Isin 53 Libuma (Lubama), king . ._ , 215 Limmu (archontat) of Bel-limuranni.i2x n. 2ZO Limmu-list 228 Lubama (Liburna), king 215 — , submitted, gave tribute, and joined the Assyrian army 215 342 INDEX Lubdi, region near Mesopotamia . , . . 19 Lud(Lydia) 19 Lukhati, name given to Patin 215 Luliof Tyre 256 — , inspired insurrection in Palestine. . 256 — , " King of the Sidonians" 256 — , his possessions 256 — , fled to Cyprus 257 Lullu, its place 19 Lulubi, king of 37, 178 — , territory of 178 Lumma-dur, King of Lagash 42 n., 44 — , son of En-anna-du n 42 h.,44 Lulumi, mountains of the 191, 198 — , passed from Assyrian to Babylon- ian influence 226 Lyco-Syria, position of 48 Lydia, one of the great powers 320 M Madyas, son of Bartatua 283 — , Esarhaddon's grandson 283 — , commanded the auxiliaries sent to Nineveh 2S3 Magan 3i.32t49t 140 — , Eastern Arabia 48, 140 — , king of 261 Magnan 49 Malatia (Melitene, Khanigalbat).i7i, 224, 225 — , belonged to the Armenian high- lands 2 24 — , traversed by Shalmaneser II 224 — , conquered by Mukallu 267 Man 228, 229, 259 — , two cities of — were overrun and plundered by Sargon 248 — , its situation 248, 277 — , oppressed by Sargon 250, 251 — , not destroyed ky Sennacherib .... 259 — , Ashur-bani-pal went out against. . - 277 Manda hordes (Babylonian Scythians) 48 Man-ishdu-shu, King of Kish .... 39, 43 "■ Manzuate, a Syrian 229 — , suffered from Adad-Nirari 229 Marduk, the city of 24, 941 9S» 123 — , the god (Merodach).. .61, 74, 9271., 94, 153, 186 — , statues brought back to Babylon. . 73, 94t 95. 173 — , treasures of the temple 121 — , temple of 121, 123 — , Jupiter his planet 148 — , cult at Babylon 152, 186 — , myth of the god 153, 1S6 — , the Creator 153 — , in North Babylonia 153, 154, 173 — , cultat Ashur 1S6, 187, 194 — , statue at Ashur 194 Marduk -akhi-Irba, King of Babylon,. 95 Marduk-apal-iddin II., King of Baby- lon 109 Marduk-aplu-iddin II., King of Baby- lon 116, 121 — , "King of the Sea Land" 116 — , contemporary with Sargon 11 iiG — , his reign 116 — , his titles assumed 116 ^ ruled under Elamite protection. ... 116, 117. n8, 123 — , the Old Testament Merodach- Baladan 116 «. — , was defeated by Sargon II 117 Marduk-aplu-Iddin II., his return to Babylon and flight 117-118 — , his death 119, 120 Marduk-balatsu-iqbi King of Baby- lon 106, 112, 228 — , a Chaldean prince 105 — , supported by the Babylonian Ara- maean tribes 106 — , alsobyElam 106 — , defeated by Shamshi-Adad 228 Marduk-bal-iddin I., King of Babylon 197 — , had victorv over Assyria X07 —,"Kingof the World" 197 Marduk-bel-usati, joint King of Baby- lon 105 Marduk-Nadin-Akhi, King of Baby- lon 96, 186, 203 — , regained Mesopotamia 96, 203 — , his inscription 186 — , carried off statues 203 — , "Kingof Sumer and Akkad" . . . 203 — , "Kingof the World" 203 Marduk-nadin-shum, King of Baby- lon 96, 104-106, 112 — , son of Nabu-aplu-Iddin. . ._ 104 Marduk-shapik-zer-mati, King of Babylon 96, 204 — , contemporary of Ashur-bel-kala . . 96 — , reigned imder Assyrian suzerainty . 105 — , in treaty with Ashur-bel-kala 204 — ."Kingof the World" 204 — , had Mesopotamia 204 Marduk-zakir-shum, King of Babylon 117 — , his short reign 117 Marduk-zir, King of Babylon 96 Mari of Damascus 229 — , paid tribute to Adad-Nirari III.. . . 229 Marqasi (Mar'ash), capital of Gur- gum 252 Mars, the planet, in Babylonian theol- ogy 148 Mash in Arabia, land of 279 Masius, Mount 214 Mati-il of Arpad (Arvad) 236, 238 — , acknowledges Assyrian suprem- acy 236 — , subjugated by Sarduris II 238 — , of Agusi, residing at Arpad 238 — , joined forces with Sarduris II 238 — , resisted Tiglathpileser III 238-239 Matinbaal of Arvad 220 Matti of Atun (or Tunnu) 24S Medes 75, 233, 267 — , took the place of Elam 282 — , primarily destroyed Assyria 314 — , invested Nineveh 314 — , took possession of Babylonia.. .321, 322 Media 25. 48, 7 1, 228, 240, 259 — , expeditions against 240, 259, 268 — , Esarhaddon's expedition failed.. . . 268 — , Indo-Germanic activity in 26S — , was watched by Ashur-bani-pal. . . 277 — , closely related to Nabopolassar.. . . 313 — , South Western 226 — , Western 73. 74 — , war against 238 Median chiefs pay tribute to Shalman- eser II 226 — , to Adad-Nirari III 229 — , under Ashur-bani-pal 227 Median frontiers 233, 319 Median Kingdom 74, 319 — , its extent 319 Median States were under Hanno. . . . 24S INDEX 343 Median Wall, built by Nebuchadrez- ^/ Vx;-. 137,316,32s — , Its use by Nabuna-id 137, 325 — , Its terminus at Opis on the Tigris. . 326 Medians plundered Nineveh 283 — . destroyed all cities true to Assyria. . 283 Mediterranean. . .34 n., 40, 124, 125, 205, ^ , 269, 323 , route lor commerce 161, 269 — , intherouteof Ashur-natsir-pall. . 215, 216 Megiddo, Josiah was sla.n at 314 Melam-kurkura, King of Babylon. ... 69 Melid (Malatia) 267 Melishikhu, King of Babylon 92, 186 — , Kassite compound, "Arad-Mar- duk" 92 Melitene (Khanigalbat). 173, 201, 223, 224, 260 — , Lalli of 219 — , put to tribute 238, 240 — , reduced to an Assyrian province . . 252 Melukha 31,48, 49 — , Western Arabia . . . - 48, 258 — , king of 257, 261, 26s n. — , was attacked by Sennacherib 258 — , visited by Esarhaddon's army 266 Memphis in Egypt 270, 272, 275 Menahem, King of Israel 240 — , paid tribute to Assyria 240 Mercenaries the support of Assyria . . . 1S4, 246, 269, 288, 289 ■ — , had to be paid and employed. . 288, 289, 300, 301 Mercury, the planet, in Babylonian theology 148 — , letter from, perhaps 185 — , his ships 163 Merodach-baladan I., King of the Sea- Land 68, 87, 163, 196 — , took Mesopotamia 92 — , his contemporaries 92 Merodach-baladan II 81, 82 — , treats with Hezekiah 82 — , fought with Sargon II 116 — , is Marduk-aplu-iddin 116 — , monument 164 — , was expelled from Babylon. 254 — , was expected to help league in Pal- estine 2s6 — , grandson of 262 — , great grand-son of 279 Mesalim 39 — , King of Kish 43 Mesopotamia 41, 48, 77. 83, 86, loi, 166 sq., 172 sg., 185, 192, 198, 201, 284 — , its relation to Assyria. 87, 88, 90, 16655., 185, 192, 198, 217, 2S6, 2S8, 289, 290, 303 — , lost to Assyria 95. io4 — , was retaken 96, 192 — , in the path of migrations 101, 104. 166 sg., 172 sg., 206 — , the path of commerce 161, 166 sg. ^ early under Babylonian culture. . . 168 169, 206 — , its historical period. . . . 169, 170, 172 sq. — , its older monuments 170 — , Aramaean Kingdom 170 — ,its kings' conquests 170, 171 — , its first records 172 — called Naharina 172 ^ as related to the Mitani. . . 173, 180. 192 193 Mesopotamia, boundaries of the old kingdom restored 202 — , under Babylonian rule 203, 204 — , the Semitic immigration 206 sq. — , in dispute between Babylon and Assyria ' 209 — , order established in 211 — , Assyrian supremacy over 217 — , AramEcan independence crushed in 2i8 — , Northern 260 n. — , was held by Nabopolassar .... 282, 314 — , its ancient name " Shubari" 282 — , passed to Babylon 284 — , position and character of the coun- try 286,303 — , attacked by the Medes 322 — , taken by Cyrus 325 Midas (Mita), King of Phrygia 250 — , in the Greek traditions 250 — .hisdeath 267 Migrations, how regulated. . 7 sq., 27 sg., 67 — , directed toward Babylonia. . -7, 18 sg., 27 sg., 67 — , routes for 20, 66, 67 — , asclassified 21 — , their principles in possessing a new country 27 sg., 3 1 Military service in Assyria 296 sq. — , pay 300 sg. — , taxation 300 sq. Mita of Muski (Mides) 250, 253 — , identified with Midas king of Phrygia 250 — , represented the old kings of Khatti 250 — , account of his expeditions 253 Mitani, the country of.74, 90, 172, 179, 185, 192, 193 ~, its situation 78, 173 — , its presents 80,81 — , also called Khanigalbat 74 — , in politics 80 sg., 90. 172 — , expelled from Mesopotamia ... .go, 176 — , as related to Egypt. . ..161, 172 sg., 174, 17s. 176 — , represents a barbarian immigration,i72 174 — , their kings 173 sg.. 169 — , opposed to the Hittites . . .174, 175, 176 — , held Mesopotamia 180 Mitylene, vassal to Assyria 224 — , Moab, with Ammon against As- syria 253 — , paid tribute to Sennacherib 257 Mohammed 33 Mohammedanism 144 «. Mongols, a savage horde 71 — , destroyed Babylon 138 Monuments and inscriptions. . .48,49, 298, 290 — , value of their witness 125 ^5., 298 — , our imperfect knowledge of 125 — , usually tell of war and kings. . . 127, 128 — , of earlier periods 128 sg., 29S — , often tell of contracts, business, ownership, etc 130 Moon-worship 152, 153 — , atUr loi, 151, 152 — , its famous sanctuary at Harran.. . 153 Muballitat-sherua. daughter of Ashur- muballit 89, 50 — , mother of Kad ashman -Kharbe I. . go Mukallu.chief of Tabal 267 — conquered Melid (Malatia) 267 344 INDEX Mukallu, with Ishkallu threatened Assyrian possessions 267 Mushesh-Nmib, a patesi 169 Mushezib-Marduk, rival king of Babylon 118, 121, 122 — , was defeated by Sennacherib .-119, 121 — , relied on Elam for help . 121 — , captured and carried into Assyria. 122 Muski, people of 198, 200, 217, 240 — , Ashur-natsir-pal I at 217 — , Hittite State submitted to Shal- maneser II 223, 249 — , subdued by Assyria 250, 251 Mutrakkil-Nusku, King of Assyria. .95, 198 Mutsatsir, south of Lake Van . . . .225, 251 — , its conquest represented on the sculptures 251 Mutsri, part of Cappadocia. . 173, 192. 198, 200, 201, 220, 250, 292 — , troops defeated by Sennacherib. . . 257 — , princes of 257 Mutsri in Anti-Taurus 252 Mutsur (Lower Egypt) 271 Myths in religion 151 sq. — , on the creation 153, 154 N Nabonassar, King of Babylon 1 10 • — , same as Nabu-natsir no — , his dynasty supreme in Babylonia. 319 Nabopolassar, King of Babylon. . loi. 102, 125, 282, 283 — . is Nabu-aplu-utsur 125 (9. v.) — , built canals 137 — , had no Elam to look for help 2S2 — , applied to the Medes 282, 314 — , held Mesopotamia 282, 314 — , called himself "King of the World" 282 — , made treaty with the Medes 284 — , had the boundaries of his kingdom defined 284 — , Ashurbani pal's death made no change at Babylonia 313 — , acknowledged the suzerainty of Ashur-etil-ili 313 — , Babylon was all that belonged to him 313 — , his son married a Median princess. 313 — . his death 316 Nabu-aplu-iddin, King of Babylon,io4, 112 — , contemporary of Shalmaneser and Ashumatsirpal 104 — , his historical acts 104 — , possibly a Chaldean 104 — , extension of his kingdom 104 Nabu-fdayan], King of Assyria ig6 — . brother of Ashur-nirari 1 1 p6 Nahu-kin-apli, King of Babylon 103 Nabuna'id. . .31 »., 32 n., 32, 137, 194 n., 283 — , Nabonidus 139 n. — , his account of the restoration of Harran 283, 303, 320 — , gave priestly estimate of Amel- Marduk 320 — , his character as antiquarian en- thusiast 2,2T sq. — , headed the priestly party 324 — , imprisoned, and his throne given to Bel-shar-utsar 325 — , had eods brought to Babylon 325 — , saw his work reversed and himself neglected 325 Nabu-nadin-zir, King of feabylon .... 114 — , also called Nadinu and Nadios ... 114 Nabu-aplu-utsur, King of Babylon ... 125 — , wasa Chaldean 125 — , isin Greek Nabopolassar ._ 125 — , raised Assyria to be a leading pow- er 126 Nabu-natsir, King of Babylon. . . . 103, 1 10 112 — , is Nabonassar in the Ptolemaic canon no — , had troubled reign 11 i-i 14 — , introduced new Astronomical Era. in, "3 — , contemporary with Tiglathpileser m 113 — , reigned under the Assyrian su- premacy 113 — , his death . 114 NabiJsallim made king of the Bit- Dakuri 262 Nabu-shum-iddin, official before Nebo 109 Nabu-shum-imbi, governor of Bor- sippa 109, no Nabu-shum, ishk(un?), King of Baby- lon 109, 112 — , interest of his inscription log — , account of his position and policy. . 1 10 — , a Chaldean of the Dakuri tribe ... no Nabu-shum-ukin, King of Babylon. . . 114 — , Babylonian in sympathy 114 Nabu-zer-kitti-lishir, tried to gain South Babylonia 262 — , grandson of Merodach-baladan. . . 262 — , fled to Elam 262 Nadin-shum, King of Babylon 86 Nadinu, a form of " Nabu-nadin-zir '* . 114 Nadios, Ptolemy's form of "Nabu- nadin-zir" 114 Naharina, name given to "Mesopo- tamia" 172 Nahr-el-Kelb (Dog River) 199 Nahr-el-kelb, its monument 216, 27 1 — , Shalmaneser II sculptured his im- age at 222 — , Sennacherib sculptured hio image at 256 Na'id-Marduk, brother of Nabu-zer- kitti-lishir 262 — , got Elam from Esarhaddon 262 Nairi Lands 201, 227, 229 — , invaded by Ashur-natsir-pal 214 — , invaded by Shamshi-Adad . . . .224, 228 — , his victories in 228 — , attacked by Adad-Nirari III 229 — , taken from Assyria by Armenia . . . 233 — , Ulluba went under Assyrian rule . . 239 — , expeditions against 240 — , its prince had to submit to Sargon II 251 Nam-makh-ni, patesi of Lagasb 45 — , married the daughter of Ur-ba'u . . 45 — , succeeded Ur-ba'u 45 Namri Median peoples . .106, 226, 233, 268 — , attacked by Shalmaneser III 233 — , disappeared 268 Nana, the goddess 53. 77 »•, 85, isi — , of Erech 85 — , of Uruk 151 Nana-Ishtar cult 24 Napata in Urartu 274 Naram-Sin. ...30, 31, 32, 34.44, 52. 53> 63. 130 »., 163, 168, 267 INDEX 315 Naram-Sin, his inscriptions. . 30, 31, 32, 34, ^•«; u T. , 37,38,45,49,152,308 — , aitticult chronology. . .37, 44, 48, 139 «., — , end of the dynasty 52 —, the stele of 3o».,63, 163 — , statues of 163, 308 — , the period of 178, 308 — , his conquests in Melukha 267 Nar-khammurabi, a canal 137 Nar-sharri (aram,. Nahr-Malka) 137 Nahr-Malka 137 Nazi-buriash, King of Nippur 88 n. — /'Shadowof the Land of Lands". .88«. Nazi-Mam ttash. King of Babylon . 90, 191 — , son of Kurigalzu 11 90, 191 — , defeated by Adad-nirari 90, 191 Nebo, temple of, at Borsippa 109 — , statues of 230 — , dedicated by the governor 230, 231 — , his worship monotheistic 231, 232 Nebuchadrezzar I.62, 69 n.,. 82, 93, 94. 05, 96, 198, 293 — , the offspring of Babylon 93 — , inscriptions and monuments 129 — , advanced on Palestine 198, 278 — , his power in Northern Phoenicia, 202, 278, 293 — , took Jerusalem 293 Nebuchadrezzar II j . . 101, 283 — , built canals 137 — , a Chaldean 316 — , son and successor of Nabopolassar, 314,316 — , defeated Nccho II. at Karchemish, 315 — , declared himself King of Babylon, 316 — , rebuilt Babylon 316, 317 — , his inscriptions speak only of works of peace 317 — , his wars are little known 317 — , besieged Tyre and had campaign in Egypt 317 — , doubt as to his having invaded Egypt 318 — , his influence was for peace . .. .319,320 Necho IL, King of Egypt 82 — , seized Palestine and Syria 314 — , from Riblah on the Orontes he ruled Jerusalem 315 — , advanced to Karchemish 315 — , defeated at, by Nebuchadrezzar II. 315 — , fled back to Egypt 315 Negub, tunnel for water at 139 Nergal, the city of 24 Nergal, god of the iinder world 152 Nergal-Shar-Utsur, King of Babylonia, 320 — , his nationality in doubt 331 — , Greek form of his name is "Neri- glissar"... - 321 — , active m defensive works and canals 321,322 — , succeeded by his son, Labashi- Marduk • ■• 321 Nergal-ushezib, King of Babylon .... 120 — , acts of his short reign 120, 121 ^, defeated and taken prisoner 121 Neriglissar. King of Babylon . . . 102 Nibe failed to get the throne of Elhpi .. 254 — , was favorite of Elam 254 Ni-gu-du, father of Ur-nina 41 Nile, its place in eariy history 3 — , fertility of its valley 131 ^g. ^ compared with the Euphrates .. .i^isg. ' jjj valley giving stone and wood . .. 140 Nimgirali-buriash, King of Nippur .. . 88 «. — ■_, '* A Saviour in the Lord of Lands ". 88 n. Nimnid, in relation to Istubar 159 — , ancient Kalki 192 — , excavations at 302 Nimrud Epic 159 Ninevah. . 25, 62, 118, i39«.. 161 177, 262, 272,27s — , her opportunity at the fall of Ba- bylon 123, i6x — , remained as before 122 — , its water supply 139 — , its commerce 161, 162 — , in the Mitani 173, 179 — ", as Assyrian or Babylonian 173 — , in prehistoric times 179 — , its cult of Ishtar 179 — , what it owed to Sennacherib II. .. . 179 — , cedars for buildings in 216 — , at Jonah's preaching ...» 232 — , Sennacherib was put to death at . . 258 — , Ashurbanipai's library at 281 — , fell before Cyaxares 283, 315 — , effect of its destruction 319 Nin-girses, the god of Lagash 23 ». Ninib-apal-ekur, King of Assyria . . 92, 197 — , contemporary of Merodach-Ba- ladan 1 92, 197 Ninib-kudur-utsur, King of Babylon .. 98 Ninib-Nadin-Akhi, King of Babylon .. 95 Ninib-tukulti-Ashur, King of Assyria . 186 Nippur (Nuffar) 24, 38, 86, 88, 91, ii3 — , inscription found at 38, 89 — , Bel of 40,89, 151, 154 — , Belit of 85 — , royal residence 87 — , searched by the Americans 88 — , was favored by the Kassites 88 — , taken by Nergal-ushezib 120 Nisroch, house of the god 260 Nomads, how restrained 291 North Babylonia. . 29, 30, 39. 41, 44, 56, 57, 66, 67, loi, 120, 121, 169, 208 — , Semitic sympathies .,38, 47, 51, 52, 101, XS2 — , under the suzerainty of Shalman- eser II 105 — , attacked by Ashurdan III 108 — , taken by Khalludusk, King of Elam 120 — , retaken by the Assyrians 120 — , purest Semitic sympathies 152 — , its deities different from South- em 152 Nubia (Kish) 271 Numeral system is due to Babylon . . . 145 Nur-Ramman, King of Larsa 54 Nutimenides, brother of the poet Al- kaios 317,318 " Old Sippar " 25 Omens observed in Babylonia 143, 144 — , collections of 168 Omri, King of Israel 216, 222 On (Heliopolis), occupied by Tanut- Ammon 274 Opis, Kingof 41,42 — , on the Tigris .. . 120, 316, 326 — , terminus of the "Median Wall" . . 326 Oracle consulted 267, 268 Orontes river 215, 240, 315 346 INDEX Padan 72 Padi, King of Ekron 256 — , delivered over to Hezekiah 256 Padu-ilu, King of Assyria 90 Palakuttu, Babylonian canal 137 — , called also Palakottas, and Falla- kopas 137 — , its identification .._ i37 «• Parsua, east of Unimia Sea . . 226, 228, 229 — , the people disappear from history . 268 Palestine, tributary to Babylon 60 — , eastern migradon to 60, 100 — , its relation to Egypt 78, 269 — , its relation to Mesopotamia . . . 170, 303 — , its relation to Assyria. . . . 210, 222, 223, 229, 248, 260, 303 — , dependent on Damascus 241 , 242 — , in league against Assyria 247 — , revolted after Sargon's death 255 — , was attacked by Sennacherib 256 — , its strategic importance 269 — , passed to Babylon 284, 317 — , its life was paralyzed when Assyria fell 285 Palestinians .-;■•• ^^9 Parties powerful in Assyrian politics. . 243, 244, 245, 259. 268 sq. — . specially seen under Sennacherib. , 259 — , under Esarhaddon 125, 272. 273 — , in political alliances 291 sq. Pashe, dynasty of 69 «., 93 j^g. Palesi, a conquered prince 29 Patin, Syrian state 215, 219, 221, 223 — , under the Aramjeans 215 — , submitted to Ashur-Natsu-pal I. . .215, 218 — , name changed to"Lukhuti" 215 — , had to submit to Tiglathpileser III.. 238, 239 — , incorporated in Syria 252 Pekah of Israel was deposed 241, 242 Paturisi (Upper Egypt) 271 Persian conquests 129, 322 Persian Gulf.. .34,40,48,68, loi, 120, 323 — , its shipping trade 162, 163 — , probably under control of Elam. . . 163 Persian Period 264 Persians advance on Babylonia 322 sq. — , were received into Babylon as de- liverers 326 Pethor river 201 Pharaohs marrying Babylonian prin- cesses 79 — , not giving their daughters to Baby- lonians 79 — , the last Pharaoh 270 — , their place in Eastern politics 293 Philistine 229, 256 — , expedition against 241 — , paid tribute 257 Philistines and the Ark of Jehovah.. . 263 n. Phcenicia, in relation to Egypt 81, 200 — , her harbors i6i — , exports from 161 — , ship buildnig 163 — , Northern 199, 202 ■ — , in the Hittite migrations 200 — , North Phoenician Princes 220 — , revolted after Sargon's death 255 — , lonians opposed to 256 — , was punished by Ashurbanipal . . . 280 — , skillful in ship-building 307 Phoenicia — North Phoenicia districts. 238 — , had an Assyrian colony 239 — , the districts joined Azriya'u and were absorbed _ ^. 240 — , they formed a new province, Tsi- mirra 240 Pinches, Mr I59»- Pishon, river of Eden 137 »■ Pisirisof Carchemish 239, 251 — , the last king 251 Pitru (Pethor) 201, 205 — , fell into the hands of the Aramaeans 206, 208 — , came under Assyrian rule 219 Pittacus, ruling in Samos 317 Polytheism in Babylonia 148 ». Populations, movements by ... .7, 8, 27 sq. Priests as officers of the temple. 133 sq., 230, 243, 244 — , as agents in education 142 sq., 230 — , as fosterers of science 156, 230 — , their influence in the East. 230, 231, 243, 244 — , their party as against that of the nobles and army 244, 245 Psammetik, son of Necho, declared his independence 275 — , Ashur-bani-pal had given him Memphis and Sais 275 "Ptolem.Vc Canon" no, 114 Padu-ilu, King of Assyria 89, 191 Puqudi. a Babylonish tribe 279 Putu (Yavan), an ally of Egypt 317 Puzur-Ashur, King of Assyria 89 Pyramids in Babylon 141 — , in Egypt 142 Pythagoras, the philosopher 143 Ramman, god of the atmosphere 152 — , or Adad, the god of Khalman (Aleppo) 219 Ramses II., King of Egypt 199, 202 — , made a league with Hittite king. . . 199, 202 — , made presents to Assyrian king. . . . 202 Raphia, Hanno was defeated at 248 Ras-al-caui 170 Religion in the East 142 sq. — , in Babylonia 146 sq., 153 sq. — , its study most difficult 146, 1 52 sq, — , as related to the heavenly bodies. . - 145, 146. 152 — , as traced in the descriptions 146 sq. — , in the formation of myths ^ 53 sq. — , Babylonian and the biblical 158 Rezon of Damascus 239 — , revolted from submission to Tig- lathpileser III 241, 242 — , his vassal, Pekah of Israel 241 • — , headed a coalition of States against Assyria 241, 242 ■ — , looked for help from Egypt 242 Riblah on the Orontes 315 Rim-Sin, King of Larsa 54 — , an Elamite 54, 57 — , last king of tlie dynasty 54, 57, 58 — , son of Kudur-Mabuk, the Elam- „ite 54 Rome, as a power 61, 241 — , as the papal centre 62 Rusas I., King of Armenia 148 — , intrigued against Sargon II 248 INDEX 347 Rusas I., had to submit to Sargon II . 251 — , country overrun and wasted 251 — , committed suicide 251 Sabaeans, their place in migrations ... 20 Sagur river 201, 215 Sais in Egypt, given to Psammetik 275 '* Salt Deserts " at the Caspian Sea . . .. 268 — . Esarhaddon's attempts on 268 Sam'al, paid tribute 240 Samal-Sendjirli 239 Samaria withheld tribute 243 — , was besieged and taken by the As- syrians 243 — , depended in vain on Egypt 243 — , was made an Assyrian province . . . 243 — , carried into captivity 247, 294 — , made a new jjrovince 247 — , in league against Assyria 247 — , people were deported and replaced 294 — , people taken to Mesopotamia and Media 294 Sammuramat, spouse of Adad- Nirari III 231 Samos, the island 317 Samsu-Iluna, King of Babylon 59 Samsu-Satana, King of Babylon 59 Sanduarri of Fundi and Sizu 264 — , in alliance with Abd-milkot 264 Sangar of Carchemish submitted to Shalraaneserl 219 Sangara, King of the "land of the Khatti" 215 — , submitted and paid tribute. , 215 — , Sangar of Carchemish submitted to Shalmaneser II 219 Saparda, a Kimmerian 267 Saracos perished in the flames 283 n. Sardanapalus, traditional name of Ashurbanipal 281, 283 Sarduri I., King of Urartu 225 Sarduris I., King of Urartu 228 Sarduris II. of Armenia 238 — , war with Tiglathpileser III 239 — , fell upon Mesopotamia 238 — , was defeated at Kummukh 238 Sarduris III., King of Urartu 280 — , submitted to Assyria 280 — , felt the pressure of the Indo-Ger- manic advance 280 Sargon I. . .30, 31, 32. 34, 44, 48. 56. 58. 68, 267 — .hisson, Naram-sin.30, 31, 32, 34, 56, 58 ~, difficult chronology 37, 44, 45. S6 — , his inscriptions 40, 62 — , against Merodach-Baladan 68 — , palace of 97 — , his conquest of Magan 267 — , compared favorably with Senna- cherib 259 — , his plan of exchanging populations. 294 Sargon II., King of Assyria. . 116, 168, 183, 207 — , fought against Babylon 116. 246 — , his victory at Dur-ilu 1 16, 246 — , made war in Syria, Palestine and Armenia ......... 116, 246 ' — was in league with the Elamites. . . 116, * 246 — took Babylon and ruled as gov- ernor 117,246 — , held Dilmun • 103 Sargon II., his time 168, 207 — , restored the privileges to Ushur . . . 234 — , renewed the war against Urartu, 248 sq. — , his inscriptions 250, 294 — , his great opponent in Asia Minor, Mita of Muski 250 — , his expeditions through Karche- mish and Syria 351 — , set up his stele, and royal image, " the might of Ashur" asr — , set out from Man through Urartu . 251 — , advanced to Lake Vaa 251 — , occupied Babylon 253 — , received presents from seven Greek "kings" 253 — , built his palace at Khorsabad. . 254, 302 — , founded Dur-Sharrukin 254, 255 — , account of 243-255 — , his death 254, 255 — , broke the strength of the Urartu. . . 241, 246 — , his accession to the throne . 243, 245, 246 — , compared with Tiglathpileser III.. 243, 245, 246 — , favored the party of the cities and temples 244, 245, 289 — , not of royal descent 245 — , brought Assyria to the climax of its power 24s sq, — , formed a mercenary army 246, 289 — , his internal policy 246, 289 — , his wars 246 — , weakened Urartu 248, 249 — , founded Kammanu 257 — , his palace in Khorsabad 302 Saul, King of the Jews 202 Sculptures 303 sg. Sculptures of Lagash 36, 37 — , at Senjirli 265 — , at Arban 303 — , at Harran 303 — , of Mesopotamia and Assyria... 303, 304 — , in Babylonia and Assyria com- pared 305 Scythians 255 Sea-land, The, Dynasty of.. . .67, 68, 97 sg. 102 — , king of 116 — , inhabitants of . 119, 163, 279 — , Nabu-zer-kitti-lishir, attempted to be king 262 Seleucids, age of the 129, 320 Semiramis 231 Semites, their home in Arabia 9 — , their achievement in Babylonia. g, 10, 35 — , their earliest migrations. . 18 sq., 35, 166 — , their place in etJhnic migrations..2i, 22, 47, 151, 206 — , take possession of Babylonia. 27 sq., 47, 60, 61, 151,206 — , their probable dates 27 sg., 206 ■ — , their reladon to the Sumerians. . 47, 1 50, 151, 152, 308 — , their place in scientific studies. 144. isOt 308, 309 — , purer in North than in South 152 — , earliest in Southern Babylonia .166, 308 — , of Ashur, their history studied. . 180, 181 — , slow in mental development . . .308, 309 Semitic script 10 Semitic thought transmission.. 4, q, id, 144, 151 Semitic literatures, their teaching . . . 147 w. Semitic migration loi, 151 348 INDEX Sendjirli in Northern Syria 169, 170 — , Senjirli, the region of 219 — , Esarhaddon's monolith at 265 — , Senjirli monolith 271 Sennacherib, King of Assyria . 34 «., 71, 82. 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 161, 179, 194. 195, 255 sq., 2^7, 278 — , became King of Babylon 1 17, 1 18 — , was mild with Babylonia. 118, 244, 255, 278 — , drove off the Aramaeans and Chal- deans 118 — , gave to Babylon a king 118 — , besieged Jerusalem 119, 250 — , defeated Bel-idni 119 — , information from iiy sq. — , fought against Elam . 121, 122, 277, 278 — , was murdered by Esarhaddon.122, 123, 245 — , his canals 130, 139 ». — , his fleet, and how manned 163 — , Nineveh rose under 179 — , found the statues at Babylon 203 — , favored the party of the nobility and army 245 — , expedition against the Zagros 255 — , chastised the Kashshu 255 — , invaded Palestine 256 — , marched through Phoenicia . . . 256, 257 — , carved his image at Nahr-el-Kelb. . 256 — , did not reach Jerusalem 257 — , turned to the West after the fall of Babylon 257 — , was successful against many cities, 257,258 — , made an attack on Arabia and Egypt 258 — , lost his army and returned to Nine- veh 258 — , was put to death by one of his sons, 258, 260 K. — , his success and failure estimated. . 259, 267 — , his palace in Nineveh 302 — , was raised by the military party . . . 259 — , fell a victim to the Babylonian or hierarchical 2 59 — , had two sons 260 — , was succeeded by Esarhaddon .... 260 — , his expedition against Egypt 270 Shadikanna (or Gardikanna) 212 — , Ararasean princes of 212 Shagarakti-Shuriash, King of Baby- lon 90 — , contemporary of Shalmaneser I 90 — , father of Bitiliashu 91 Shagashalti-buriash, son of Kudur- Bel 194 «• Shalmaneser I., King of Assyria . . .90, 192, 198, 201, 211, 215, 217, 224 — , pushing his conquests ... 171, 192, 201, 211 — , secured Mesopotamia 192, 217 — , conquered the Mitani 192 — , founded colony in Nairi 215 — , took Malatia for Assyria 224 Shalmaneser II., King of Assyria . . 96, 104, 105, 107, 182, 183, 201, 205, 211, 218, 249 — , subdued Babylonia 105, 107 — , at Harran 170, 303 — , his discovery of the statue 205 — , grandson of Tukulti-Ninib II 211 — , his inscriptions 211 — , succeeded Ashur-Natsir-pal 1 218 Shalmaneser II., made three expedi- tions to Mesopotamia 218, 288 — , offered sacrifice at Khalman (Alep- po) 219 — , his conquests from his monuments, 219 220, 221 — , his great victories are doubted. 220, 221 — , devastated Syria 222 — , returned to Nineveh 223 — , made another vain attempt against Damascus 223, 300 — , could not touch Palestine 223 — , set on Northern Syria and Asia Minor ._ 223-227 — , effectof his wars considered . . .226, 227 — , insurrection against 227, 230 — , death ^ 227 — , referred to in the Eponym Canon . . 23S — , restored the sanctuary at Harran . . 303 Shalmaneser III., King of Assyria .108, 115 — , date of his accession 108 — , succeeded Adad-nirari III ■ . . 233 — , on the defensive against Urartu . . . 323 Shalmaneser IV., King of Assyria. 115, 116 — , was Ululai in Babylonia 115, 116 — , succeeded his father, Tiglathpile- ser III :..... 243 — , closely followed his father's policy . 243 — , his death 243, 245 — , his action against Babylon 244, 278 — , the principles in his policy . . ..243, 244, 245. 278 — , favored the party of the nobility and army 245 Shamash, the sun-god 24, 64, 154 — , his oracle questioned 267 Shamash-mudammig, King of Baby- lon 103, 112 Shamash-ibni, King of Bib-Dakuri, deposed 262 Shamash-shum-ukin, King of Baby- lon 124 — , aided to the throne by Esarhaddon, his father 124, 245, 272, 273 — , restored the statues of Marduk ... 124 — , his date and position 124, 278 — , brother of Ashur-banipal. . 123-24, 245, 272 — , his death 125 — , was supported by the hierarchical party 245 — , was crowned with his brother ..272, 273 — , his mother a Babylonian 273 — , his place in the political intrigues. . 272, 273, 278 — , the insurrection made under him . . 278 — , lost hold of the Babylonian tribes . 279 — , had allowed Tyre to be independ- ent 280 — , his plan of exchanging populations, 294, 295 Shamshi-Adad, patesi of Ashur 180 — , son of Ishmi-Dagan 180 Shamshi-Adad I., King of Assyria .... 204 — , son of Tiglathpileser 1 204 Shamshi-Adad, son of Ashur-nadin- shum 106 — , his inscription 107 — , his expeditions 107 — , date of death 106, 112 Shamshi-Adad II., King of Assyria . . . 227 — , son of Shalmaneser II 227 — , "King of the World" 227 — , reconquered Assyria 227 INDEX 349 Sharnshi-Adad, his expeditions... .227,228 Sizu in Cilicia 264 — , defeated Marduk-balatsu-iqbi 228 — , the Sis of Islamitic times 264 n. Shapi-Bel, chief of the Gambuh 263 Slavs 50 Sharezer, son of Sennacherib 260 «. Smith, George 159 ». —, equivalents of the name 260 «. South Babylonia, 29,31, 54,56,57, 150,166 Shareani-shar-ali (Sargon I.) 30 — , wassubdued by the North . .30, 58, 137 , his inscriptions 30 — , Sumerian sympathies ... 30, 35, 47, 51, — ,accountsof 30 52,137 150 — , King of Agade 30 — , included Chaldea 105 — , his conquests 30 — , early Semites in 166 Shar Kishshati, " King of the World " . ifiS Statues were carried from Egypt to Shasha (Shushan, Susa), city of 85 Assyria 270 Shatt-el-Hai (Kut-el-Amara) 138 "Stele of Vultures," a monument of Shibar-Shikhu. King of Babylon 97 Naram-sin 37. 41, 63, 299 — , son of Erba-sin. 97 Subnatriver 201 Shilani-Shuqamuna, King of Baby- — , source of the Tigris 20 Ion 98 — , inscriptions at its source 211, 224 Shirgal (parutu)-stone 34 ». Sukhme traversed by Shalmaneser II. , 2 24, Shishku. dynasty of 66, 70 225 Shubari (Mitani) 191 Suki, princes of 104 — , ancient name of Mesopotamia .. .. 282 — , half -nomadic state 213 Shumer, the king of 46 ». — , war with 213 — , Dungi, the king of 46 «. Sumashtu, mountains of 41 Shuna, Aramaean prince 212 Sumer or South Babylonia . . 29, 39, 47, 51, Shu-ush-shi-akhi. King of Babylon. . . 69 57, 58, 67 Shushan (Susa. Shaska) 55 n. Sumer and Akkad 57. 137 Shushinak, goddess 86 «. — , kings of 57, 58, 113, 116, 137 Shutur-uakhunde 92 «. Sumerian language 12, 13, 14, 29 Shuzigash (Nazibugash), King of Baby- — , the oldest records 12 sq. Ion . . J 84, 90 — , inscriptions and texts 13, S3 — , deposed and killed 90 — , its agglutinative structure is Siana in North Phoenicia 220 — , its decay IS. 16 Sibara, Median stronghold 228 — , its culture 32, 49, 67, 150, 308 — , had monolith statue of Shamshi- — .influence in South Babylonia-38, 39, 47, Adad 228 49.150 Sibylline Books borrowed from Baby- Sumerians, the 12 sq, Ionia 144 — , originators of Babylonian culture. . 12, Sidon. ships from 163 ». 3i, 130, 150, 308 — , sent tribute to Ashur-Natsir-pal I. . 216 — , their history unknown. . 17, 47, 130, 150 — , paid tribute to Shalmaneser II. ... 222 — , their advance to Babylonia. . .27 jg., 47, — , tributary to Adad-Nirari III 229 130 — , in intrigues 256 — , their relation to the Semites.. .12 57., 47, — , Ithobal, new king of 257 ^ ^ 150, 308 — , revolted from Assyria 264 Sumu-Abi, King of Babylon 59 — , was separated from Tyre by Sen- Sumu-la-ilu, King of Babylon 59 nacherib 264 Sun-god, his worship monotheistic ... 230 — , was destroyed by Esarhaddon 264 Sura, chief city of Bit-khadippi 212 — , its site occupied with Kar-Esar- Suri,itsrelation toBabylonia.. ..47, 48, 74, haddon 264 185, 208, 303 — , an Assyrian governor stationed — ,landof 208 there 264 — , Mesopotamia and Western Asia — , Esarhaddon-burg formed the nu- Minor 261, 303 cleus of the new city 264 — , king of 261 Simmash-shikhu, King of Babylon . .. 68, Susa, its relation toBabylonia.. .19,39,41, 69 n., 97 n. 65 ». Sin, the moon-god 23, 154, 169 — , discovery at 43«., 63 — , the god of Harran 169 — , temple at 86 ». Singara, the Sinjar range 25, 191 — , Assyrian army marched to 278 Sin-Iddin, King of Larsa 54 — , conquest of, by Ashur-bani-pal ... 279 Sin-MubalUt, King of Babylon 59 Sutama, father of Dushratta _. 174 Sin-shar-ishkun succeeded Ashurbani- — , also of a daughter Gilukhipa 174 pal 282 Suli, nomad Syrian tribes. . .83, 90, 97, 191, — , jointly with bis brother, Ashur-etil- _ 207 jli 282 — , in meeting the Aramaean immigra- —, his death'.'. •„•■;•■• ^^3 ti™;-- --.i^rw- '°l Sippar 30 »., 48, 56. 120, 194 — , their devastation of Babylonia .207, 208 protector of Babylonian deities .124,125 — , occupied Mesopotamia 208 ' gQ(js were returned by Esarhaddon, 263 Sutruk-Nakhundi 30 n. ' sun.god of 73 «., 97. 152 Syennesis of Cilicia, a peace-maker. . . 320 Sippar (Abu-Habba) 24 "Synchronous History," nature of the Sippar fof Anunit) 24 document ....... 188 Sippar (of Anira) 24 —, its contents 188,198,203,204 Sinoara on the Euphrates 316.326 Syria, migraUons into ;2''*° 5ir-pur-la (or Lagash) 23 — , the country. . 41, 161, I99, 227. 284, 32^ 350 INDEX Syria, political connecdon with Egypt, ySsg., igg, 323 — , the desert 83, 90, 161 — , exports from 161 — , in relation to Mesopotamia. . .170, 199, 303 — , was controlled by Damascus 216 — , conquests of Shalmaneser II. in. . . 219, 220, 221 — , object of dispute between Assyria and Urartu 225 — , suffered from Adad-Nirari III .... 229 — , Assyrian rule was established. . 239, 248 — , in league against Assyria 247, 249 — , its coast towns under Esarhaddon.. 266 — , passed to Babylon 284 ^, with the fall of Assyria all action was paralyzed .. . 285 — , North 233, 248 Syrian desert 98, 161 — , marched through and plundered. . 279, 280 Syrians, as related to the Babylonian Arts 140 Tabal, state nortli of Taurus. .223, 248, 267 — , imder tribute to Shalmaneser II. . . 223, 224 — , paid tribute to Tiglathpileser III. . 240 Tahargu, Cushite King of Egypt. . 264, 292 — , assisted West Tyre in revolt 264 — , news of his defeat 265, 266 — , his struggle against Esarhaddon. . . 270, 271 — , fled from Egypt to Nubia 270, 271 — , report of his regaining all Egypt. . . 271 — , was defeated by Ashur-bani-pal. . . 273, 274 — , died in his fortifications 274 Tammuz (Adonis) 159 Tanut-Ammon, nephew, succeeded Taharqu in Napata 274 — , tried to seize Egypt 274 — , met resistance at Memphis 274 — , retired on Thebes but was defeated 274 Tarkhulara of Gurgum paid tribute.. . 239 Tartan, the 221 Tashi-Gurumash, King of Babylon. . . 89 Taurus, mountain 173, 249, 267 — , reached by Shalmaneser II. . . . 223, 224 — , visited by Esarhaddon 267 Taylor-prism 1 2 1 «. Teharka, King of Egypt 82 Tela, a stronghold in the Nairi Lands. 214 Tel-abnava 213 Tel-Halaf 170 — , monuments at 303 Tel-Amarna, capital city 73 — , collection of letters . . ..76, 171 sg., 178, 180, 199, 202 — , collection described . . .76, 78, 161, 171, . , 172^5- — , period 199 Tell-Bashir, Joscelin of .. . 201 Telloh, place of discoveries 33, 40, 45 — , (Lagash) 45, 141 — , the art of 308 Temples, their importance in national life 142 — , lar^e holders of lands 133 sg., 142 — , their influence on architecture .... 142 Tenants of Land 134 Teshub, god of the Mitani 172 — , also Hittite god 172, 200 Teumman succeeded Urtaki in Elam. . 278 — , marched against North Babylo- nia 278 — , was forced to retreat at Dur-Uu . . . 278 Thales, the pbiiosopher 143 — , foretold eclipse 320 Thebes in Egypt 270, 270, 273, 274 — , limit of the Assyrian conquest. -271, 273 Thothmes, King of Egypt 314 Thupuskia 229 Thuruspa on Lake Van 224 — , besieged by Tiglathpileser III 240 Tiglathpileser I., King of Assyria. .95, 173, 192, 198, 200, 205 «., 206, 211, 224 — , his date 179, 198 — , restored a temple in Ashur 179 — , his inscriptions _. 179, 200, 211 — , his reign a time of migrations 200 — , tells his wars 200 sq., 214 — , sailed for the West 202, 214 — , exchanged presents with Pharaoh- 202, 203 — , lost Mesopotamia 203, 204 — , his track in the West 215, 216, 217 — , his victories over the Hittites 217 — , took Malatia for Assyria 224 Tiglathpileser II 205 n., 209, — , "King of the World" 210 Tiglathpileser III, King of Assyria. . .34 «., 113, 114, 128, 206, 211 n., 228, 332, 236 — , his action against Babylonia. . 113, 114, 232, 244, 278 — , was "King of Sumer and Akkad". 113 — , was " King of the Four Quarters of the World" 113 — , his reign 113, 114,237-242 — , was supreme ruler in Babylonia. . . 115, 242 — , called Ptdu on the Babylonian lists 115 — , his inscriptions and monuments. 128 sq. — , his home policy. . 183, 184, 206, 232, 236 — , against the Aramaean tribes 206, 207 — , chose Kalkhi as tlie capital 234 — , may have been son of Adad-nirari. 236 «. — , his wars under three geographical heads 237 sq. — , his successes in Babylonia . . ..115. 237, 242; 278 — , appeared before Arpad 238 — , defeated Sarduris II 23S -^, three years' war against Arpad. . . . 238 — , gave Tsimirra to Shalmaneser .... 240 Tiglathpileser III., feudal lord of Da- mascus 240 — , left his image at Van 241 — , was able to weaken Urartu . . ..241, 248 — , for two years was king of Babylon. 242 — , was succeeded by his son Shalman- eser IV 242, 243 — , compared with Sargon II. . 243, 244, 289 — , strove to limit the power of tlie priesthood 243, 244, 289 — , strove to limit the privileges of the larger cities. . . 243, 244. 289 — , the motive in his policy. . .243, 244, 245, 289 — , favored tlie party of the nobility and army 245 — , compared favorably with Senna- cherib.. 259 INDEX 351 Tiglathpileserlll., first acquired land by the Euphrates for Assyria 290 — , began deporting populations 294 — , his palace at Caleh 302 Tigris river, its place in early history. . .3, 5^ 181 75. 9O1 177. 191. 214, 225, 286 — , Opisonthe , 120 — , its water system 135, 225 — , its source in the Subnat 201 — ■, boundary between Assyria and Media 284, 286 — , its local conditions 286 — , crossed by Cyrus 325 — , valley of the 225 Tiharaet, god 154 Til-Barsip on the Euphrates 219 — , became Akhuni's capital 219 — , put under an Assyrian governor. . . 219 Til-Basheri 201 Tintir (Babylon), dynasty 70 Tributary states, their feeling and ac- tion 241, 242 Tsarpanit, spouse of Agu-Kakrime. . . 73 Tsimirra, Assyrian province 240, 247 — , its boundaries 240 ■ — , given to Shalmaneser as governor. . 240 ■ — , Hamath incorporated in 247 — , in league against Assyria 247 Tukulti-mar, a king 73 «• Tukulti-Ninib I.. King of Assyria. . 86, 87, 91, 192, 193-197, 198, 203, 230 — , his conquests. ... 86, 87, 91, 193 sq., 203 — ■, conquered Babylon 91, 193, 203 — , took Bit-ili-ashu prisoner 193 — , his seal and titles 194 — , " King of the World " 194 — , "son of Shalmaneser " 194 ' — , his date 194. 203 — , his overthrow 204^ 230 Tukulti-Ninib II 211 — , his aims and enterprises 211 — , his inscriptions 211 Turks 71 Tuskha, capital of the Nairi-Lands ... 214 — , had palace built by Ashur-natsir- pal 214 Tutammu, prince of Kinalia, de- throned 239 Tyre sent tribute to Ashur-Natsir-pal I. 216 — , Phoenician city 216, 256 — , was allied to Israel 221 — , tributary to Adad-Nirari III 229 — , Hiram of 238 — , it submitted to Assyria 242 — , its influence resented 252 — , was besieged by Sennacherib 257 — , defended itself 257, 259, 264, 265 — , "island" besieged "and taken by Alexander the Great" 264, 300 — , was divided between island and mainland 265 — , resisted Esarhaddon 264,265,266 — , mainland portion made Assyrian province 265. 266 280 — , the province of, is independent. . . 280 — , besieged in vain by Nebuchadrez- zar II 317 — , West Tyre 263 U Uaiti, king in Syria . . ... .... ... 280 Ualli, son of Akhshen. Kmg of Man . . 277 — , succeeded his father 277 Ualli, submitted to the Assyrians .... 277 Uam-buriash. King of Nippur 88 ». — , " Sprout of the Lord of Lands " . . .88 n. Uddadu of Eridu 53 U^baru (Gobryas) led the Persians mto Babylon 326 Ukin-zir, King of Babylon 114 — , Chinzer the, of Ptolemy 114 — , the prince of Bit-Amukani 114 — , made prisoner by Tiglathpileser III IIS — , his reign 114-115 U-Kush, pate.si of the "City of the War Chariot " 40 Ulluba, of the Nairi-Lands 239 — , came under Assyrian rule 239 — , taken from Armenia 239 — , strongly fortified 239 Ullusunu, son of the King of Man .... 251 — , submitted to Sargon 11 251 Ululai, name of Shalmaneser IV. in Babylonia 115, 116 Umliash (Dupliash) 72 «. Umman-Manda (Manda hordes) . .48. 283 — , under Astyages 283 Umman-menanu, Kingof Elam . . 121, 122 — , in league with Mushezib-Mar- duk 121 — , fought with Sennacherib It. . . .121,122 Ungal-da ( ?)-ak ( ?), King of Kish ... 40 Ungal-ki-gub-ni-du. a king 40 Ungal-Kurum-Zigum, patesi of La- gash 39 Ungal-si-Kisal, co-regent 40 Ungal-ushum-gal 45 Ungal-zag-gi-si, King of Uruk .^ 34 Unqi (Amq) resisted the Assyrians .. . 239 Upi (Opis) 25 Ur (Erech) 77«,,i32 Ur, Dynasty of 5I1 57. 85 Ur (Mugheir). ... 23, 34 »., 40, 41, 45, 132, 262, 325 — , inscriptions at 28 — , patesi of 45 — , its "kings rule Babylonia" 51 — , its deity the Moon-god. ..101, 151, 152, 32s — , as a centre of civilization 132, 151 — , home of Abraham 168 — , its gods brought to Babylon 325 Urana-Hor, son of Taharqu 270 — , carried with much treasure to As- syria 270 Urartu in North Armenia ... 224, 225, 228, 230. 267 — , became powerful 225 — , reached out toward Mesopotamia and Syria 225 — , checked by Tiglathpileser III 225 — , devastated by Shamshi-Adad 228 — , was avoided by Adad-Nirari III. . . 229 — , in collision with Assyria 232 — , as against Tiglathpileser III . . 237, 238, 230 — , was driven out of Syria 238 — , line of forts against, by the Assy- rians 139 — , called the " Fortress-land " 239 — , Assyrian policy against 240, 267 — , its citadel besieged 240 — , its defence effective 240, 241 — , its rule over Syria and Nairi ended, 241 — , its strength was broken by Sargon II 241 352 INDEX Urartu, Sargon renewed the war against 248 sq. — , its power broken by Sargon 252 — , rival of the Kimmerians 252, 2C7 — , was not checked by Sennacherib.. . 259 — , its loss was felt by Assyria 279, 319 — , its later kingdom became Armenia, 280 — , lost its place and power 319 Ur-ba'u, patesi of Lagash 45 Ur-e. . 45 Urgur, the King of Ur 1 5, 36, 46, 5 t — , father of Dungi 45, 46, 5 1 Ur-in-gi, Mount 34 «• Ur-lumma was routed 43 Umina (Ur-Nina) 37, 40. 4I1 42, 44 — , son of Ni-gu-du, and King of La- gash 41 — , table of descendants 42 «. Ur-ningirsu, priest and patesi 45. 46 — , son of Gudea 45 Ur-ningul, patesi of Lagash 46 Urtaki succeeded his brother Khumba- khaldash in Elam 263 — , friendly with Esarhaddon 263 — , stirred up war with Assyria under Ashur-bani-pal 277 — , wished to establish himself in Baby- lonia .' 277 — , his death 277 Uru-az-ki 34 »• Uruk (Warka) 24, 34«., 41 — , inscriptions at 28 , — , the kings of 34, 40 — , Ungal-zag-gi-si of 34 — , taken by the Assyrians 120 — , as a centre of civilization 132, 151 — , its deity 151, 152 — , its god Ishtar 152 Uni-ka-gina, patesi of Lagash 39 — , king of Lagash 39, 44 Urukagina, canal builder 139 n. Uni-ki-Az 34 «■ Urumia Sea .... 25, 214, 225, 226, 228, 248 Urumush, King of Kish 39 Ur-utu, patesi of Ur 45 Ur-zag-uddu, Kmg of Kish 39 Usana in North Phoenicia 220 Ushpina, name given to Ispuinis 228 Ushshi (Dushi, Abu-shi), King of Babylon 89 Ushu, at Tyre 265, 280 Van, Lake . . . .201, 20,=;, 224, 225, 226, 227 Vyran-Shehir near Kerkuk 178 «. W War-Chariot, city of the 40, 4ii 42, 43 Water, regulation of its supply ..... 135 sg. — , in the Euphrates valley 135 — , in the Nile valley 135 Weights and measures traced to Baby- lonia 14s Western Asia 6,21, 30. 3i. 33» 75. 78 Western civilization 3,4 — , history as expanded 4, 5 — , as derived from the East 6 — , as influenced from Egypt 78 " West-Land " in Palestine 48 Winckler, traveler and explorer 74 »• Writing, its place in civilization. . . . 130, 131 Written tradition, its laws 10, 130, 131 Yakham, Aramjean state 215 Yakinlu, King of Arvad, tributary to Assyria 276 — , sent his sons to Assyria 276 — , had hopes in Taharqu 275 Yamutbal on the Tigris 207 Yasu-bigalli chastised by Sennacherib, 256 Ya-u-bi-'di, King of Hamath 247 — , was flayed 248 Ya'udi, the prince of 239 Yavan (Putu), ally of Egypt 317 Yemama 266 Yemen 266 Zab river 139, 217, 225 Zab, the Lower 177, 178, 197, 287 — , the Upper 177 Zabibi, Arab king 240 Zabu, King of Babylon 59 Zagros mountains 178 Zagros _ 71 — , Sennacherib's expedition against . - 255 — , Assyrian army marched throi-^h the passes 278 Zagros, Western 198 Zamama-shum-Iddin I., King of Baby- Ion 92, 197 — , attacked by Ashurdan 92, 197 Zamani traversed by Shalmaneser IL . 224 Zamua near the Urumia Sea 214 Zigirtu, Indo-Germanic tribe 248. 252 — , favored Urartu 248, 252 Zodiacal signs were obtained from Babylon m