All alphabets and all modes of writing have their ultimate origin in
pictures or hieroglyphs, and the cuneiform script offers no exception to
this universal rule. When the early pictorial symbols are used to
indicate objects and ideas other than the particular object of which the
symbol is a representation the accuracy or inaccuracy of the picture
becomes a matter of small importance, and an inevitable tendency to
sketch the picture in the most speedy manner possible ends finally in
the evolution of a purely cursive script. In Mesopotamia this course of
development—or deterioration—was hastened by the nature of the material
used in later times for all ordinary writing purposes, i.e. the
all-abundant clay of the valley, it being impossible to draw the lines
and curves necessary for the production of pictures on so plastic a
substance as clay. The shape assumed by the signs forming the characters
was due to the same cause, the point at which the stylus first comes in
contact with the soft clay being unavoidably thicker than the remainder
of the stroke which automatically tapers off into the form of a wedge.
But so forcible is the influence of habit and so strong the imitative
tendency, that we find the cuneiform characters which owed their
wedge-shaped formation entirely and solely to the adoption of clay as a
writing material, faithfully and slavishly copied on the colossal stone
bulls, stelæ and wall-reliefs of later Assyrian kings.
The early decipherers of cuneiform had no specific knowledge of its
pictographic origin, for all the inscriptions at that time discovered
showed the same stereotyped and cursive script, but since their day a
vast number of archaic inscriptions have been brought to light which
prove conclusively that cuneiform as such was no invention of either
Semites or Sumerians, but was simply the last stage in the process of
degeneration to which the early pictures of the pre-Semitic Sumerians
were subject. In the following illustrations (Figs. 1 and 2) we have a
number of characters taken from actual inscriptions and arranged in
order of evolution so to speak,[44] the sign in the left-hand column
containing the most archaic form of the sign as yet discovered, the
signs in the right-hand column showing the gradual transition to cursive
cuneiform, while the last sign in the column is the ordinary late
Assyrian ideograph. Thus in “A” we have the crude picture of a man
recumbent, and one can follow the course of its development or
deterioration from the various forms it has assumed on monuments and
bricks arranged in order of sequence. Given the ordinary cuneiform sign
for “man” by itself, it would be quite impossible to conjecture that it
originated in the picture of a man at all. Below (“B”) we have the old
Sumerian hieroglyph for “king,” consisting in a man lying down,
surmounted by either a crown or an umbrella as part of the insignia of
royalty. In “C” we have the picture of a man’s head in recumbent
posture, the lips being represented by two slanting lines, while the
series of characters in the centre illustrates the various forms the
sign has assumed on the bricks and monuments, and the arrangement shows
the process whereby the original hieroglyph gradually discarded all
trace of its pictorial origin, and became a cursive stereotyped sign the
principal value of which is “mouth.” Below we have another rude picture
of a man’s head, but on this occasion he wears a beard, which would
suggest a full-grown man; hence the meaning of the Assyrian ideograph
is “strength,” “be strong,” or “protection.” In figure “E” there is
a representation of a potted plant: this sign, instead of becoming
simpler as it makes each progressive step towards cuneiform, becomes
paradoxically more complex, until it finally subsides and assumes its
normal cursive form, the principal value for which is “cypress-tree.”
Below (“F”) two plants are seen, growing likewise in a pot: the
progress is again obvious, the meanings of the ideogram being “plant”
and “garment”; this latter meaning is probably attached to the sign
through the use of flax as a material for clothing. “G” appears to be
a tree growing by water; the late cuneiform sign has numerous values,
but none of them suggest any immediate connection with the obvious
signification of the picture-character from which it was developed. “H”
gives us a picture of a reed, the late cuneiform character being the
ideogram for “kanu” which means a “reed.”
[Illustration: FIG. 1.—From Harper’s _Old Testament and Semitic
Studies_, Vol. II, pp. 241 ff.—_By permission_.]
In Fig. 2, “Q” we have a picture of a fish; the meaning of the Assyrian
ideogram derived from it are a “fish,” to “peel” (from preparing a fish
for eating), the god Ea, on account of his sometimes being represented
in the form of a fish, and finally a “prince,” and “great” from its
association with Ea. Below (“R”) is another fish, provided with what
appears to be a dorsal fin, hence the signification of the Assyrian sign
is “broad” or a “monster.”
Our next illustration (“I”) is concerned with water: we have here the
wavy lines for water which is similarly represented in both Egyptian and
Chinese hieroglyphics. Below (“J”) we have a representation of the
little irrigation ditches by which gardens are watered: hence the
cuneiform ideogram derives the meaning of “field” and stands for two
distinct Assyrian words—“ginu” and “iklu,” both of which mean “field.”
It is somewhat doubtful what the hieroglyph in “K” is intended to
represent: Hommel regarded it as a picture of a leathern bottle which
would not unnaturally suggest the meaning “desert”; Barton, on the other
hand, with perhaps greater probability regards it as a rude outline of
the Euphrates valley, with its two rivers and its “occasional sections
of irrigated and so fertile land,” indicated by the cross-lines, and he
rightly says that this would account for the meanings “plain” and
“lands,” and by an extension “desert,” “elevated country,” and last of
all “back.” In “L” we see the picture of a house, which however hardly
corresponds with our conception of what a house should be: the cuneiform
sign derived from it is the ideogram for “bitu” (the Hebrew “Beth”
occurring in the proper names Bethlehem, “house of bread,” Bethshemesh,
“house of the sun,” etc.), the ordinary Assyrian word for “house.”
[Illustration: FIG. 2.—From Harper’s _Old Testament and Semitic
Studies_, Vol. II, pp. 241 ff.—_By permission_.]
The next figure (“M”) shows us a covered and steaming pot; hence the
meanings of the later cuneiform sign are to “burst forth,” “exult,”
“rejoice.” “N” is somewhat doubtful, but it probably represents a
“priestly garment,” inasmuch as the cuneiform sign derived from it is
the Assyrian ideogram for “šangu” a “priest.” “O” is apparently a rude
picture of either a crown or a ceremonial umbrella, as the emblem of
greatness, the picture of the Assyrian king attended by a slave whose
office it is to hold an umbrella over the head of his royal master
being, through its frequent occurrence on the bas-reliefs which adorned
the walls of the palaces, sufficiently familiar. However that maybe, the
cuneiform sign is the ordinary ideogram for “rabu” (the root which
occurs in Rabshakeh, Rabsaris, etc.), which means “great”; we have
already seen this sign compounded with the picture of a man, the two
together meaning “king.” In “P” we see a picture of a bowl in which two
tinder-sticks have been inserted with a view to their ignition by
friction; hence is derived the meaning of the cuneiform sign developed
from it,—“fire.”
As has been already indicated, clay was the material mostly used by the
Assyrian and Babylonian scribes for the purposes of writing; but stone
was also extensively used from the earliest to the latest times. Stone
obelisks, colossal statues of bulls and lions, and last but far from
least the bas-reliefs which decorated the walls of the royal palaces
were generally covered with an inscription, the wedges sometimes
measuring as much as two inches. In writing on sculpture the carved
figures were completely ignored, the inscription being chiselled
regardlessly through every detail of the carving. Stone was however
sometimes used solely and exclusively as the material medium for
perpetuating a legal agreement, or immortalizing the work of some
self-satisfied grandee, and tablets of limestone or alabaster exist in
large numbers, good examples of which are those of Rîm-Sin and
Sin-Gamil, rulers of the ancient city of Larsa.
Boundary-stones or land-marks form another interesting class of
inscribed stone objects. The texts refer to land-tenure and property
conveyancing, while the upper part of most of these boulder-shaped
monuments is sculptured in relief with mythological emblems. They belong
almost exclusively to the Kassite period. Sometimes a plan of the field
seems to have been chiselled on the stone which marked its boundary. A
good example of such a boundary-stone is that of Nebuchadnezzar I, which
was discovered at Nippur and is published by W. J. Hinke;[45] a further
point of interest about this stone is that it is inscribed with a hymn
to En-lil, the god of Nippur.
But neither the Babylonians nor the Assyrians confined themselves
exclusively to the use of clay and calcareous stone as the material
whereon to write their inscriptions. Sometimes the hardest volcanic
rocks were employed for the purpose, doubtless in consideration of their
durability and power of resisting the devastating influences of time and
climate. Thus in the course of the German excavations at Babylon a plate
of dolerite measuring about a foot and a half square and bearing an
inscription of Adad-nirari the son of Ashur-dan was discovered. So too
Dungi and Bur-Sin, kings of Ur (_circ._ 2350 B.C.), have left us
inscriptions chiselled on hard diorite, the inscriptions themselves
being of a votive character, while a club-button made of the same
material and bearing an inscription of ten lines was found at Babylon.
The various statues and stelæ made of these hard igneous stones and
found both in Assyria and Babylonia, though more frequently in the
mother country, practically always bear an inscription. A good example
of an Assyrian inscription on basalt is that found on the basalt statue
of Shalmaneser II (860-825 B.C.), which was brought to light in the
course of the recent excavations conducted by the Deutsche
Orient-Gesellschaft at Ashur. Again the numerous stone gate-sockets
discovered in the ruins of early buildings in Babylonia are nearly all
inscribed with the name and titles of the person who erected the
building, and sometimes the original inscription has been erased or
obliterated to make room for the inscription of a later ruler, who
knowing full well the difficulty of procuring stone in the low-lying
country of Babylonia, was not so short-sighted as to cast away the
gate-sockets of his vanquished predecessor, but on the contrary utilized
them for his own new building. Thus for example the gate-socket of
Lugal-kigub-nidudu, an early king of Sumer, was subsequently used by
Shar-Gâni-sharri, king of Akkad, in the construction of his temple at
Nippur.
But sometimes stones of comparative rarity, such as lapis lazuli, were
employed as a material whereon to engrave inscriptions: thus a tablet
made of that material and dedicated by Lugal-tarsi, an early king of
Kish, to the god Anu and the goddess Ninni, is preserved in the British
Museum, and in the course of the recent excavations at Babylon two bars
of lapis lazuli with reliefs and both bearing cuneiform inscriptions
were discovered. One of these showed the picture of a god standing up,
surmounted with a feather crown, and holding the symbol of lightning in
each hand, while his dress is decorated with three shields, and a
cuneiform inscription of five lines is further added; on the other, a
god in similar posture and dress but holding a staff and ring on his
breast and grasping the tail of a double-horned dragon in his right hand
is portrayed: the god’s girdle is decorated with figures, while on one
of the three shields adorning the raiment, horses are depicted, and
there is an accompanying inscription of eight lines.
Metal in like manner was not exempt from being drawn into the service,
the metals mostly employed being bronze and copper. Thus the female
statuettes from Tellô all bear an inscription, Elamite or Babylonian as
the case may be, the general purport of which is that the statuette is
dedicated with a view to the preservation of the life of the donor: so
too the colossal copper lance-head discovered on the same site bears a
royal inscription, while the famous bronze gate-sheaths from Balâwât
belonging to the time of Shalmaneser II, are perhaps the most familiar
instance of cuneiform inscriptions engraved on bronze. Many bronze
tablets of the Assyrian period have been found, and the well-known
bronze doorstep of Nebuchadnezzar II provides us with another excellent
example of an inscription engraved on metal. Moreover the more precious
metals such as silver and gold were occasionally inscribed. Inscriptions
on gold are very rare, but by no means unknown. M. de Sarzec for example
found a plate of gold bearing a cuneiform inscription at Tellô, and a
strip of gold bearing the name of the illustrious Narâm-Sin of Agade was
brought to light in the course of the American excavations at Bismâya.
But the inscribed clay tablets, countless in number and infinitely
various in size, shape and contents, far outweigh in importance all
other kinds of cuneiform inscriptions in existence. A detailed treatment
of the latter would far exceed the necessary limits of this little
volume, but a few words may be said regarding the main classes of
tablets discovered. Their size and shape are sometimes indicative of the
period to which they belong, sometimes of the subject-matter with which
they deal. A very early type is represented by those found below the
level of Ur-Ninâ’s building at Tellô; the tablets in question which have
not been baked in an oven, and are round in form, deal with the sale and
purchase of land. Similar round tablets were found by the German
excavators at Fâra, which were however baked and not sun-dried. The same
rounded baked clay tablets were evidently in vogue at the time of
Bur-Sin, for several have been brought to light which are dated in his
reign, and contain details regarding certain landed property. But the
commonest type of clay tablet is that characterized by its rectangular
shape, sometimes square, but more frequently oblong, and varying greatly
in size. The tablets in the Kouyunjik collection, which represents the
largest, and in one sense the only Assyrian library as yet discovered,
vary from one to fifteen inches in length when complete, many of them
being made from the very finest clay. The writing is sometimes
exceedingly minute, though marvellously clear and sharp, and is more or
less stereotyped in character. Astrology, astronomy, history, mythology,
magic, medicine, mathematics, prayers, hymns, lists of gods, omens,
lexicography and grammar are all well represented in this famous
library. Many of the texts are copies of older Babylonian literature
made by Ashur-bani-pal’s scribes, and stored away in the royal archives.
Some of the texts are bilingual, the top line containing the Sumerian
ideographic version, and the lower line giving the Assyrian translation,
and these bilingual inscriptions together with the syllabaries have
enabled scholars to unravel and elucidate at all events to some extent
the old Sumerian language.
By the year 1873 all scholars were agreed that the cuneiform script was
not invented by the Semitic Babylonians, but by a people who spoke an
agglutinative as opposed to an inflexional language, a language which
was therefore, at least in this respect, akin to the Tartar languages.
In the following year however Joseph Halévy, the famous French Semitist,
started a theory which denied the existence of a Sumerian language
altogether, and explained the ideographic texts in the bilingual
inscriptions already alluded to, as a secret writing intelligible only
to the priests; but primâ facie the theory lacked probability and even
plausibility. Halévy, it is true, propounded his theory at a time when
the study of Sumerian was in its infancy, though it can hardly be said
to have grown out of its childhood even at the present day, but this
notwithstanding, it would be indeed singular if the priests took the
precaution to enshrine their secret lore in cryptic language, and then
frustrated themselves by subscribing an Assyrian translation. Moreover
many of the Sumerian inscriptions treat of such very ordinary matters,
that it is extremely difficult to see how it could have been necessary
to employ a cryptic language to conceal them. A more ready explanation
is to be found in the theory accepted by the majority of scholars
to-day,—that the Sumerian language existed side by side with Semitic
Babylonian, and was used much as Latin is to-day.
One class of tablet especially easily distinguishable by its shape and
size is that comprising legal contracts for the exchange of land, cattle
and property of every description. They are small in size, oblong in
shape, both sides being slightly concave, and the whole not unlike a
small narrow pillow in general appearance. Many of these contract
tablets were enclosed in clay envelopes to ensure their preservation.
When a contract was effected by the Babylonians, the contracting parties
had recourse to a legal or priestly official, and the terms of the
agreement were set forth on a clay tablet which was deposited either in
the temple or the record chamber: it was furthermore protected by a clay
envelope upon which the terms inscribed on the contract tablet were
copied in duplicate; thus every precaution was taken to secure the
preservation of the original document. Sometimes the text on the
envelope varies somewhat from that contained in the document itself, and
in such cases the envelopes therefore have more than a purely archaic
interest, and are of actual linguistic value. One or two copies were
made of the contract and were kept by either or both of the contracting
parties. The deed was subscribed by the witnesses, one of whom was the
scribe who drew up the document and sealed it. The seal was generally
affixed by rolling a small cylinder seal over the tablet while still
moist, though sometimes a three-sided clay cone received the impress of
the seal, and this cone was attached to the tablet by means of a reed
inserted in the apex of the cone, the other end of the reed being joined
to the tablet by a piece of moist clay. Many of these contract “case”
tablets belong to the times of Khammurabi, the most celebrated king of
the First Dynasty of Babylon (_circ._ 1900 B.C.). Some of the envelopes
of these tablets bear the impression of a cylinder-seal, a good example
of which is found on a tablet recording the sale of a piece of land by
Sin-eribam and his brother to Sin-ikisham (Brit. Mus. No. 92649). The
clay of this class of tablet is generally somewhat dark in colour, and
the characters are often difficult to read.
The later, or Neo-Babylonian legal and commercial documents show greater
variation in size and shape than those belonging to the time of the
First Dynasty of Babylon. They are generally oblong, but on the smaller
tablets the text is generally written in such a manner that each line
extends over the length of the tablet instead of over its breadth. The
larger legal documents of this period are sometimes inscribed on tablets
of quite exceptional thickness, their general size and shape being not
unlike that of an old Latin prayer-book.
_PLATE IX_
[Illustration: _British Museum_
INSCRIPTIONS ON CLAY ILLUSTRATING THE SIZES AND SHAPES OF THE TABLETS
ETC. USED BY THE BABYLONIANS AND ASSYRIANS]
But contracts were not the only kind of inscription protected by a clay
envelope or “case”; letters and despatches sometimes shared the same
consideration. Like contracts, letters were inscribed on small oblong
tablets, such as might be easily transmitted through the Babylonian and
Assyrian post, that is to say carried by the messenger whose duty it was
to convey the letter to its destination. As might be expected, the
envelope in this case bore the name of the person to whom the letter was
addressed, and occasionally also that of the sender, just as the
envelopes of letters are sometimes initialled to-day. Many of these
letters are of a royal character, and emanate from kings and princes.
Quite a number of letters and despatches from the early kings of Babylon
to their officials and governors have come down to us. They treat of
divers subjects: in one Khammurabi writes to Sin-Idinnam commanding him
to send forty-seven shepherds to Babylon in order that they may give an
account to the king of the flocks under their care (Brit. Mus. No.
23122). In another letter the king writes to the same prince with
instructions to arrest three officials and despatch them to Babylon,
while in yet another Khammurabi writes to Sin-Idinnam with orders to
restore a certain baker to his former position. Some of Sin-Idinnam’s
official correspondence has also been preserved. In one communication he
directs a legal officer to summon a certain man to appear in court
(Brit. Mus. No. 12868). Sin-Idinnam’s duties were clearly very varied
and must have been sufficiently arduous. In one of these despatches
Khammurabi orders Sin-Idinnam to cut down some “Abba” trees required by
smelters of metal (Brit. Mus. No. 26234). In another he commands the
same personage to see to the mustering of crews for transport-barges
(Brit. Mus. No. 27288). Others contain instructions to attend to the
repair of the banks of the Euphrates at various points. But his duties
were not exclusively civil; judicial affairs fell to his charge also;
thus it is that to him the king writes regarding a dispute between a
landlord and his tenant concerning the payment of rent for land, while
he is perpetually receiving orders to arrest delinquent officials and
other misconducted persons. In one letter (Brit. Mus. No. 12827)
Khammurabi directs Sin-Idinnam to postpone the date of a certain trial,
owing to the presence of the plaintiff, one Ili-Ippalzam, in the city of
Ur at a certain festival.
Elsewhere (Brit. Mus. No. 12841) Khammurabi issues a report to the same
overburdened official to the effect that certain persons have cancelled
a deed of mortgage, and commands the instant presence of Enubi-Marduk,
who received their lands on mortgage, in Babylon. Many of the letters of
these early kings of Babylon embody the royal wishes regarding the date
of sheep-shearing, or the reaping of corn, as well as instructions
concerning the irrigation canals.
In one letter, Samsu-iluna (Brit. Mus. No. 27269) instructs Sin-Idinnam
and the judges of Sippar to prohibit certain fishermen from fishing in
forbidden waters; at other times the same judges are directed to send a
particular case for trial in the capital (cf. Brit. Mus. No. 27266).
Another collection of letters written in cuneiform and on clay tablets
are the famous Tell el-Amarna Letters,—generally of somewhat larger size
and less distinctly oblong than the ordinary Babylonian despatches. The
majority of them are rectangular, though a few are oval. Some are convex
on both sides, some are flat on both sides, while others are
plano-convex or pillow-shaped. These tablets were discovered at Tell
el-Amarna in Egypt; they represent nearly all that remains of the
official and diplomatic correspondence which passed between the Pharaohs
Amenḥetep III and Amenḥetep IV of the Eighteenth Dynasty (i.e. they
belong to the fourteenth or fifteenth century B.C.), and their various
officials and vassals in Palestine. Some of the tablets found at Tell
el-Amarna are inscribed with letters from the King of Babylon, from the
King of Mitani, from the King of Alashiya, and other royal potentates,
but as they are mostly of Palestinian and Egyptian interest, a detailed
consideration of them would be out of place in this volume.
Among the larger rectangular clay tablets in existence are those
containing syllabaries. Owing to the deterioration and simplification
which the cuneiform characters underwent in the course of ages, the
Assyrian scribes found it necessary to make lists of the early
Babylonian characters adding what they believed to be the later Assyrian
equivalents. Most of these syllabaries consist of three columns; in the
middle column the Assyrian sign to be explained is given, on the left
the Sumerian value of the same, and in the right-hand column either the
Assyrian name for the sign, or else the Assyrian meaning, and
occasionally both. These syllabaries are obviously of immense importance
in the reconstruction of the old Sumerian language.
Other tablets of abnormally large size are those dealing with astrology,
magic and medicine: the two latter subjects are inextricably confused
owing to the fact that they went hand in hand with each other; the
medicine was prescribed and administered, but the medicine alone was by
no means sufficient to cure the patient, that could only be effected by
the potent spell of the magician.
But the largest clay tablets emanate from Babylonia and contain lists of
accounts mostly concerning grain, cattle, asses, lambs, sheep. Some of
these tablets are perfectly square, and measure as much as a foot each
way, while nearly all of them are more square than oblong: the clay of
which they are made is of fine quality, and the Babylonian characters
with which they are inscribed are singularly clear. Most of them may be
assigned to the second half of the third millennium B.C., and many of
them are specifically dated in the reign of Dungi, king of Ur about 2400
B.C. But as already mentioned, tablets were not always rectangular;
sometimes they assumed a circular form. Tablets of this kind are usually
inscribed in the Sumerian language, and contain lists of landed estates
and fields, with information regarding their size, their capacity for
producing crops and other details. Many of these circular tablets are
dated, the year deriving its name after some noteworthy event, as was
the regular mode of dating in the early days of Babylonian civilization.
Thus many of these lists are dated “in the year after that in which the
land of Khukhnuri was laid waste,” and were drawn up in the reign of
Bur-Sin and other kings of Ur, i.e. during the second half of the third
millennium B.C.
The clay of which these tablets are made is of the finest, while the
writing is exceedingly clear; they vary from about two to six inches in
diameter, and are oval on one side and more or less flat on the other.
Other large rectangular tablets are inscribed with lists of the
principal events in different kings’ reigns and are obviously of immense
importance for the reconstruction of Babylonian and Assyrian history.
One of the tablets belonging to this class (Brit. Mus. No. 92702) gives
us a list of the chief events, after which the various years of
Sumu-abu, Sumu-la-ilu, Zabum, Apil-Sin, Sin-muballit, Khammurabi and
Samsu-iluna, kings of the first dynasty of Babylon (about the end of the
third and beginning of the second millennium B.C.) were named. Another
of the same class (Brit. Mus. No. 92502) gives us a list of the leading
events which took place in Babylonia and Assyria from the third year of
Nabonassar, king of Babylon 744 B.C., and the first year of
Shamash-shum-ukîn, the contemporary of Ashur-bani-pal (668 B.C.). One of
the most interesting events here alluded to is the assassination of
Sennacherib by his son on the 20th day of the month Tebet, and in the
23rd year of his reign. Among other historical documents of primary
importance, a tablet generally known as “the Synchronous History” must
be placed in the first rank. This document is an agreement drawn up
about the time of Ashur-bani-pal, and it had as its object the
settlement of boundary-disputes between Babylonia and Assyria, while its
historical value lies largely in the short notices of the various
conflicts and alliances between the two countries from about 1600-800
B.C. One other large rectangular tablet (K. 3751) of exceptional
interest alike to the historian and the Biblical student, is the
document in which Tiglath-Pileser III, king of Assyria 745-727 B.C.,
gives us an account of his building operations and conquests, and
mentions “Ahaz, King of Judah” as one of his tributary princes. This
tablet must have been very large when complete, for what remains of it
measures nine inches by seven and a half. The largest tablet in the
Kouyunjik collection is not however historical in character, but
contains a list of the names and titles of various gods, and in its
present fragmentary state measures fifteen inches in length.
Other cuneiform inscriptions were written on pieces of clay shaped like
cones. Most of these terra-cotta cones date from the time of the dynasty
of Ur, i.e. the latter half of the third millennium B.C. Two good
examples of this kind of cuneiform inscription bear the name of
Sin-gashid, king of Erech, and record the dedication of a temple to the
god Lugal-banda and the goddess Ninsun, and give the price of wool,
grain, oil and copper during the reign of Sin-gashid (Brit. Mus. 91,
150). Another baked clay cone is inscribed with the name of Sin-idinnam,
king of Larsa about 2300 B.C., and likewise records the dedication of a
temple—in this case that of the Sun-god, Larsa being one of the
principal centres of the worship of the Sun-god. But the conquering
Elamites, who imitated their subjugated enemies, the Babylonians, in so
many ways, also adopted the practice of writing cuneiform inscriptions
on clay cones; for an example of an Elamite cone we may compare Brit.
Mus. 91, 149, which bears the name of Kudur-Mabug. But the habit of
writing inscriptions on clay cones did not cease at this period, at
least not permanently, for a similar cone exists bearing the name of the
Neo-Babylonian king Nabopolassar (625-604 B.C.), and like the older
cones recording the dedication of a temple, this time the temple of
Marduk at Babylon. (Brit. Mus. No. 91,090.)
But Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions on clay were not always in the
form of rectangular or circular tablets; frequently they assumed the
form of large hexagonal, octagonal, or decagonal prisms, or in the case
of Babylonia of barrel-shaped cylinders. It was customary to place these
large clay memorials in the four corners of the foundation of a building
in Babylonia and Assyria, a good example of which practice was found at
Muḳeyyer (Ur): the cylinders from Ur had been deposited at the four
angles of the foundation of the temple of Sin, the Moon-god, by
Nabonidus, and they record the rebuilding of the temple by Nabonidus
(555-538 B.C.) on the site of the ancient temple erected by Ur-Engur and
his son Dungi, about 2400 B.C. The text finds a fitting conclusion in a
prayer to the god whose fane he is restoring, on behalf of his eldest
son Bal-shar-uṣur, the Biblical Belshazzar. Three octagonal prisms of
baked clay give us an account of the campaigns and building operations
of Tiglath-Pileser I, king of Assyria about 1100 B.C. (Brit. Mus.
91033-91035). Another prism is inscribed with an account of the
expeditions of Sargon, king of Assyria 721-705 B.C. (Brit. Mus. No.
22505), while the fragments of an octagonal prism of the same king, and
also preserved in the British Museum, (K. 1668, etc.) are of peculiar
interest in that they give Sargon’s own account of his campaign against
the Philistine city of Ashdod, which is referred to in Isaiah XX. I.
Judah is mentioned as one of the allies of Ashdod, but the Assyrians
were ultimately successful in reducing the rebellious city. Sargon’s
successor, Sennacherib (705-681 B.C.), similarly caused his military
achievements to be recorded on large clay prisms, and the most
interesting document of his reign is preserved on the six sides of a
hexagonal prism now in the British Museum (91032). It records the defeat
of Merodach-Baladan, king of Babylon, and the subjugation of various
other peoples, but the particular interest attaching to this cylinder
lies in the allusions to the Palestinian campaign of 2 Kings xviii.
Sennacherib states that he severely punished the rebellious people of
Ekron and restored the banished Padî to his throne; he then proceeded to
attack Hezekiah in Jerusalem “his royal city”; he laid siege to
Jerusalem, and shut Hezekiah up like a bird in a cage, but in spite of
this demonstration, he was clearly unable to open the cage and seize the
bird. However, Hezekiah seems to have been duly impressed, and he
hastened to buy off Sennacherib with gifts and tribute—“thirty talents
of gold, eight hundred talents of silver, precious stones, eye paint ...
ivory couches and thrones, hides and tusks, precious woods and divers
objects,” together with his daughters, his women-folk and male and
female musicians—apparently being the price.
Another interesting octagonal prism of this same king has been recently
acquired by the British Museum (No. 103,000). It contains information
regarding two campaigns not recorded elsewhere. The first of these,
which took place in 698 B.C., was undertaken to suppress a revolt in
Cilicia; the campaign was completely successful and the Assyrian power
was entirely restored in those regions. It is interesting to note that
the city of Tarsus was one of those which Sennacherib sacked on this
occasion. The second campaign took place three years later in 695 B.C.,
and resulted in the siege and capture of a certain city called
Til-Garimum in the land of Tubal, which lay to the north-east of
Cilicia. We are also furnished with an account of the rebuilding and
fortification of Nineveh by Sennacherib, which contains valuable
information regarding the inner and outer wall of the city, and the
positions and names of the fifteen gates. It is dated in the eponymy[46]
of Ilu-Ittia, the Assyrian governor of Damascus. This cylinder was
apparently buried as a foundation memorial in the structure of one of
the city gates referred to in the text.
Esarhaddon, Sennacherib’s son and successor, has likewise left us a
number of hexagonal prisms of historic importance. One of the principal
events narrated on Esarhaddon’s cylinders is the siege and capture of
Sidon and the subjugation of the surrounding country. Ashur-bani-pal,
Esarhaddon’s famous son and successor, has left us a number of cylinders
and prisms, but by far the most important is that upon which an account
of the principal events of the early part of his reign is inscribed
(Brit. Mus., No. 91,026). We have here a record of his first and second
Egyptian campaigns, of the defeat he inflicted upon Tirhakah, the
Ethiopian king of Egypt, and the sack of Thebes, the capital of the
country. The capture of Tyre is also narrated and the campaign against
Te-Umman, king of Elam, whom Ashur-bani-pal slew and whose severed head
is seen hanging from a tree in the bas-relief in which Ashur-bani-pal
and his wife are reclining at meat in their garden. There is also an
account of the siege and capture of Babylon, whose king
Shamash-shum-ukîn had thrown off the suzerainty of Assyria; the conquest
of Arabia is recorded as well as the final triumph of the Assyrian arms
over Elam, and the text concludes with an account of Ashur-bani-pal’s
building operations.
We have already alluded to a clay cylinder belonging to the
Neo-Babylonian king Nabonidus, while another cylinder of the same king,
which has been discussed elsewhere (cf. p. 7), is equally notable, as a
complete system of chronology has been based upon its contents.
Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon 604-561 B.C., and belonging to the
same dynasty has likewise left us a number of barrel-shaped cylinders,
the inscriptions upon which are chiefly concerned with a recital of his
building achievements, while to the cylinder of Cyrus the Persian
conqueror of Babylonia (538 B.C.) reference has been made elsewhere (cf.
p. 74). But the practice of writing cuneiform inscriptions on baked clay
cylinders did not even come to an end with the Persian kings of
Babylonia, for we have a cylinder (Brit. Mus. 36277) bearing an
inscription in archaic Babylonian characters, of Antiochus Soter, king
of Babylonia about 280 B.C.; it records the restoration of the temples
E-Sagil, and E-zida in Babylon and Borsippa in the year 270 B.C., and
concludes with a prayer to the god Nebo on behalf of Antiochus, his son
Seleucus and his wife.
But besides rectangular, round, barrel-shaped, cylindrical and
cone-shaped clay inscriptions, yet other varieties exist. Among these a
four-sided block of clay forming an elongated kind of cube, the height
of which is 9-1/2 inches and the breadth of each of its four sides 3-3/4
inches (Brit. Mus. No. 92611), deserves a mention; its date is about
2100 B.C., and it is inscribed with lists of the names of fish, birds,
plants, stones and garments.
Another unique object is a clay model of an ox-hoof (Brit. Mus. No. R.
620), inscribed with forecasts. A somewhat similar object is found in a
clay model of a sheep’s liver, also preserved in the British Museum (No.
92,668); the inscription which it bears is magical in character, and the
object was probably used for divination purposes. Other tablets, though
not being moulded in the form of a sheep’s liver, bear the incised
outlines of different parts of the liver. Hepatoscopy, or the practice
of deriving omens from the shape, size, or condition of the liver, was
one of the most popular forms of magic among the Babylonians and
Assyrians.
Plans of cities seem to have sometimes been drawn on clay tablets, a
good example of which is afforded by a tablet discovered at Nippur, and
incised with a plan of that city, a plan which in spite of its antiquity
seems to have helped the work of the excavators in no small degree.
Another example is the British Museum fragment (No. 35385), on which a
plan of part of the city of Babylon is still to be seen. Sometimes the
plan was merely that of an estate (cf. Brit. Mus. No. 31483), but in one
instance at all events, the world itself is the subject (Brit. Mus. No.
92687), the most interesting feature of which from the geographical
point of view is the world-encircling ocean—the Babylonians believing
the earth to be surrounded by and apparently supported on water: the
earth itself was supposed to resemble an inverted saucer in shape, while
the heavens bore the same shape, the only difference being that they
were obviously more extensive, and the lower edges rested on the earth
itself, while the edge of the earth rested upon the ocean.
Sometimes amulets were made of clay, a good example of which is Brit.
Mus. No. 85-4-8, 1; it is shaped like a cylinder-seal, and is inscribed
with an incantation for Shamash-Killâni.
Other inscribed clay objects are those known as astrolabæ or instruments
for making astrological calculations.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.] [Illustration: FIG. 4. (Brit. Mus., 103040.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 5. (Brit. Mus., 91102.)]
Labels again were made of clay: two small clay labels (Brit. Mus. K.
1400, K. 1539) give us the titles of two series of astrological and omen
tablets; while another (K. 3787) gives us the name of Khipa, a female
slave; it is dated in the 11th year of Marduk-aplu-iddina, i.e. _circ._
710 B.C. There are miscellaneous clay objects which do not properly come
under the heading of terra-cotta figures or clay bas-reliefs, and
therefore may be mentioned here. Sometimes clay squeezes or impressions
were made of early inscriptions; an excellent example of such squeezes
was acquired some years ago by the University of Pennsylvania (cf. Fig.
3);[47] it is a squeeze made by a Neo-Babylonian scribe of the sixth
century B.C. of an inscription belonging to Shar-Gâni-sharri, king of
Akkad. The characters of course are raised in relief and read backwards.
Allusion is elsewhere made to the clay brick-stamps with which
Babylonian kings were in the habit of inscribing their building bricks:
an interesting specimen of a clay brick-stamp is seen in Fig. 4. It is a
fragment of a stamp belonging to Narâm-Sin, the son of Shar-Gâni-sharri.
The characters here are of course in relief and reversed as in the case
of a seal. Another clay object of exceptional interest is seen in Fig.
5; it is a clay covering made by order of Nabopolassar, king of Babylon
625-604 B.C., for the preservation of the stone tablet of his
predecessor Nabû-aplu-iddina (_circ._ 870 B.C.). It was presumably
during the course of his work at the restoration of the temple of the
Sun-god at Sippar that he alighted upon this early tablet. The clay
cover bears an inscription of Nabopolassar on the reverse side and
records the various offerings he deposited at the shrine of the Sun-god.
The cover itself was found in a baked clay box, also preserved in the
British Museum, and probably belonging to the same reign. Clay was
further employed by the sculptor for tentative sketches, and by the
stone-inscriber for rough drafts. Thus the sculptor to whom we are
indebted for the portrayal of Ashur-bani-pal, king of Assyria, spearing
a lion, sketched out his picture in clay preparatory to chiselling it on
slabs of stone, and his original sketch is still extant (cf. Brit. Mus.
93011), while we can still see two rough drafts on clay of epigraphs
inscribed on Ashur-bani-pal’s bas-reliefs (cf. Brit. Mus. Sm. 1350 and
K. 4453 + K. 4515).