CHAPTER IV--RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA AND THE DAWN OF CHALDÆAN HISTORY

In the preceding pages it has been shown how recent excavations in Egypt

have revealed an entirely new chapter in the history of that country,

and how, in consequence, our theories with regard to the origin of

Egyptian civilization have been entirely remodelled. Excavations have

been and are being carried out in Mesopotamia and the adjacent countries

with no less enthusiasm and energy than in Egypt itself, and, although

it cannot be said that they have resulted in any sweeping modification

of our conceptions with regard to the origin and kinship of the early

races of Western Asia, yet they have lately added considerably to our

knowledge of the ancient history of the countries in that region of the

world. This is particularly the case in respect of the Sumerians, who,

so far as we know at present, were the earliest inhabitants of the

fertile plains of Mesopotamia. The beginnings of this ancient people

stretch back into the remote past, and their origin is still shrouded in

the mists of antiquity. When first we come across them they have already

attained a high level of civilization. They have built temples and

palaces and houses of burnt and unburnt brick, and they have reduced

their system of agriculture to a science, intersecting their country

with canals for purposes of irrigation and to ensure a good supply of

water to their cities. Their sculpture and pottery furnish abundant

evidence that they have already attained a comparatively high level in

the practice of the arts, and finally they have evolved a complicated

system of writing which originally had its origin in picture-characters,

but afterwards had been developed along phonetic lines. To have attained

to this pitch of culture argues long periods of previous development,

and we must conclude that they had been settled in Southern Babylonia

many centuries before the period to which we must assign the earliest of

their remains at present discovered.

That this people were not indigenous to Babylonia is highly probable,

but we have little data by which to determine the region from which

they originally came. Prom the fact that they built their ziggurats, or

temple towers, of huge masses of unburnt brick which rose high above

the surrounding plain, and that their ideal was to make each “like a

mountain,” it has been argued that they were a mountain race, and the

home from which they sprang has been sought in Central Asia. Other

scholars have detected signs of their origin in their language and

system of writing, and, from the fact that they spoke an agglutinative

tongue and at the earliest period arranged the characters of their

script in vertical lines like the Chinese, it has been urged that

they were of Mongol extraction. Though a case may be made out for this

hypothesis, it would be rash to dogmatize for or against it, and it is

wiser to await the discovery of further material on which a more certain

decision may be based. But whatever their origin, it is certain that the

Sumerians exercised an extraordinary influence on all races with

which, either directly or indirectly, they came in contact. The ancient

inhabitants of Elam at a very early period adopted in principle

their method of writing, and afterwards, living in isolation in the

mountainous districts of Persia, developed it on lines of their own. [*

See Chap. V, and note.] On their invasion of Babylonia the Semites

fell absolutely under Sumerian influence, and, although they eventually

conquered and absorbed the Sumerians, their civilization remained

Sumerian to the core. Moreover, by means of the Semitic inhabitants of

Babylonia Sumerian culture continued to exert its influence on other

and more distant races. We have already seen how a Babylonian element

probably enters into Egyptian civilization through Semitic infiltration

across the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb or by way of the Isthmus of Suez,

and it was Sumerian culture which these Semites brought with them.

In like manner, through the Semitic Babylonians, the Assyrians, the

Kassites, and the inhabitants of Palestine and Syria, and of some

parts of Asia Minor, Armenia, and Kurdistan, all in turn experienced

indirectly the influence of Sumerian civilization and continued in a

greater or less degree to reproduce elements of this early culture.

It will be seen that the influence of the Sumerians furnishes us with

a key to much that would otherwise prove puzzling in the history of the

early races of Western Asia. It is therefore all the more striking to

recall the fact that but a few years ago the very existence of this

ancient people was called in question. At that time the excavations in

Mesopotamia had not revealed many traces of the race itself, and its

previous existence had been mainly inferred from a number of Sumerian

compositions inscribed upon Assyrian tablets found in the library

of Ashur-bani-pal at Nineveh. These compositions were furnished with

Assyrian translations upon the tablets on which they were inscribed,

and it was correctly argued by the late Sir Henry Rawlinson, the late M.

Oppert, Prof. Schrader, Prof. Sayce, and other scholars that they were

written in the language of the earlier inhabitants of the country whom

the Semitic Babylonians had displaced. But M. Halévy started a theory to

the effect that Sumerian was not a language at all, in the proper sense

of the term, but was a cabalistic method of writing invented by the

Semitic Babylonian priests.

[Illustration: 147.jpg LIST OF ARCHAIC CUNEIFORM SIGNS.

Drawn up by an Assyrian scribe to assist him in his studies

of early texts. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

The argument on which the upholders of this theory mainly relied was

that many of the phonetic values of the Sumerian signs were obviously

derived from Semitic equivalents, and they hastily jumped to the

conclusion that the whole language was similarly derived from Semitic

Babylonian, and was, in fact, a purely arbitrary invention of the

Babylonian priests. This theory ignored all questions of inherent

probability, and did not attempt to explain why the Babylonian priests

should have troubled themselves to make such an invention and afterwards

have stultified themselves by carefully appending Assyrian translations

to the majority of the Sumerian compositions which they copied out.

Moreover, the nature of these compositions is not such as we should

expect to find recorded in a cabalistic method of writing. They contain

no secret lore of the Babylonian priests, but are merely hymns and

prayers and religious compositions similar to those employed by the

Babylonians and Assyrians themselves.

But in spite of its inherent improbabilities, M. Halévy succeeded in

making many converts to his theory, including Prof. Friedrich Delitzsch

and a number of the younger school of German Assyriologists. More

conservative scholars, such as Sir Henry Rawlinson, M. Oppert, and Prof.

Schrader, stoutly opposed the theory, maintaining that Sumerian was a

real language and had been spoken by an earlier race whom the Semitic

Babylonians had conquered; and they explained the resemblance of some of

the Sumerian values to Semitic roots by supposing that Sumerian had

not been suddenly superseded by the language of the Semitic invaders

of Babylonia, but that the two tongues had been spoken for long periods

side by side and that each had been strongly influenced by the other.

This very probable and sane explanation has been fully corroborated

by subsequent excavations, particularly those that were carried out at

Telloh in Southern Babylonia by the late M. de Sarzec. In these mounds,

which mark the site of the ancient Sumerian city of Shirpurla, were

found thousands of clay tablets inscribed in archaic characters and in

the Sumerian language, proving that it had actually been the language of

the early inhabitants of Babylonia; while the examples of their art and

the representations of their form and features, which were also afforded

by the diggings at Telloh, proved once for all that the Sumerians were

a race of strongly marked characteristics and could not be ascribed to a

Semitic stock.

The system of writing invented by the ancient Sumerians was adopted by

the Semitic Babylonians, who modified it to suit their own language.

Moreover, the archaic forms of the characters, many of which under the

Sumerians still retained resemblances to the pictures of objects from

which they were descended, were considerably changed. The lines, of

which they were originally composed, gave way to wedges, and the number

of the wedges of which each sign consisted was gradually diminished, so

that in the time of the Assyrians and the later Babylonians many of the

characters bore small resemblance to the ancient Sumerian forms

from which they had been derived. The reading of Sumerian and early

Babylonian inscriptions by the late Assyrian scribes was therefore an

accomplishment only to be acquired as the result of long study, and it

is interesting to note that as an assistance to the reading of these

early texts the scribes compiled lists of archaic signs. Sometimes

opposite each archaic character they drew a picture of the object from

which they imagined it was derived. This fact is significant as proving

that the Assyrian scribes recognized the pictorial origin of cuneiform

writing, but the pictures they drew opposite the signs are rather

fanciful, and it cannot be said that their guesses were very successful.

That we are able to criticize the theories of the Assyrians as to the

origin and forms of the early characters is in the main due to M. de

Sarzec’s labours, from whose excavations many thousands of inscriptions

of the Sumerians have been recovered.

The main results of M. de Sarzec’s diggings at Telloh have already been

described by M. Maspero in his history, and therefore we need not go

over them again, but will here confine ourselves to the results which

have been obtained from recent excavations at Telloh and at other sites

in Western Asia. With the death of M. de Sarzec, which occurred in his

sixty-fifth year, on May 31, 1901, the wonderfully successful series of

excavations which he had carried out at Telloh was brought to an end. In

consequence it was feared at the time that the French diggings on this

site might be interrupted for a considerable period. Such an event would

have been regretted by all those who are interested in the early history

of the East, for, in spite of the treasures found by M. de Sarzec in the

course of his various campaigns, it was obvious that the site was far

from being exhausted, and that the tells as yet unexplored contained

inscriptions and antiquities extending back to the very earliest periods

of Sumerian history.

[Illustration: 150.jpg FRAGMENT OF A LIST OF ARCHAIC CUNEIFORM SIGNS.]

Opposite each the scribe has drawn a picture of the object

from which he imagined it was derived. Photograph by Messrs.

Mansell & Co.

The announcement which was made in 1902, that the French government had

appointed Capt. Gaston Cros as the late M. de Sarzec’s successor, was

therefore received with general satisfaction. The fact that Capt. Cros

had already successfully carried out several difficult topographical

missions in the region of the Sahara was a sufficient guarantee that the

new diggings would be conducted on a systematic and exhaustive scale.

The new director of the French mission in Chaldæa arrived at Telloh in

January, 1903, and one of his first acts was to shift the site of the

mission’s settlement from the bank of the Shatt el-Hai, where it had

always been established in the time of M. de Sarzec, to the mounds where

the actual digging took place. The Shatt el-Hai had been previously

chosen as the site of the settlement to ensure a constant supply of

water, and as it was more easily protected against attack by night.

But the fact that it was an hour’s ride from the diggings caused an

unnecessary loss of time, and rendered the strict supervision of the

diggers a matter of considerable difficulty. During the first season’s

work rough huts of reeds, surrounded by a wall of earth and a ditch,

served the new expedition for its encampment among the mounds of Telloh,

but last year these makeshift arrangements were superseded by a regular

house built out of the burnt bricks which are found in abundance on the

site. A reservoir has also been built, and caravans of asses bring water

in skins from the Shatt el-Hai to keep it filled with a constant supply

of water, while the excellent relations which Capt. Cros has established

with the Karagul Arabs, who occupy Telloh and its neighbourhood, have

proved to be the best kind of protection for the mission engaged in

scientific work upon the site.

The group of mounds and hillocks, known as Telloh, which marks the site

of the ancient Sumerian city of Shirpurla, is easily distinguished from

the flat surrounding desert. The mounds extend in a rough oval formation

running north and south, about two and a half miles long and one and a

quarter broad. In the early spring, when the desert is covered with a

light green verdure, the ruins are clearly marked out as a yellow spot

in the surrounding green, for vegetation does not grow upon them. In the

centre of this oval, which approximately marks the limits of the ancient

city and its suburbs, are four large tells or mounds running, roughly,

north and south, their sides descending steeply on the east, but with

their western slopes rising by easier undulations from the plain. These

four principal tells are known as the “Palace Tell,” the “Tell of the

Fruit-house,” the “Tell of the Tablets,” and the “Great Tell,” and,

rising as they do in the centre of the site, they mark the position of

the temples and the other principal buildings of the city.

An indication of the richness of the site in antiquities was afforded

to the new mission before it had started regular excavation and while

it was yet engaged in levelling its encampment and surrounding it with a

wall and ditch. The spot selected for the camp was a small mound to the

south of the site of Telloh, and here, in the course of preparing the

site for the encampment and digging the ditch, objects were found at

a depth of less than a foot beneath the surface of the soil. These

included daggers, copper vases, seal-cylinders, rings of lapis and

cornelian, and pottery. M. de Sarzec had carried out his latest

diggings in the Tell of the Tablets, and here Capt. Cros continued

the excavations and came upon the remains of buildings and recovered

numerous objects, dating principally from the period of Gudea and

the kings of Ur. The finds included small terra-cotta figures, a

boundary-stone of Gamil-Sin, and a new statue of Gudea, to which we will

refer again presently.

In the Tell of the Fruit-house M. de Sarzec had already discovered

numbers of monuments dating from the earlier periods of Sumerian history

before the conquest and consolidation of Babylonia under Sargon of

Agade, and had excavated a primitive terrace built by the early king

Ur-Ninâ. Both on and around this large mound Capt. Cros cut an extensive

series of trenches, and in digging to the north of the mound he found a

number of objects, including an alabaster tablet of Ente-mena which had

been blackened by fire. At the foot of the tell he found a copper helmet

like those represented on the famous Stele of Vultures discovered by

M. de Sarzec, and among the tablets here recovered was one with an

inscription of the time of Urukagina, which records the complete

destruction of the city of Shirpurla during his reign, and will be

described in greater detail later on in this chapter. On the mound

itself a considerable area was uncovered with remains of buildings

still in place, the use of which appears to have been of an industrial

character. They included flights of steps, canals with raised banks,

and basins for storing water. Not far off are the previously discovered

wells of Bannadu, so that it is legitimate to suppose that Capt. Cros

has here come upon part of the works which were erected at a very early

period of Sumerian history for the distribution of water to this portion

of the city.

[Illustration: 154.jpg Obelisk of Manishtusu.]

An early Semitic king of the city of Kish in Babylonia. The

photograph is taken from M. de Morgan’s _Délégation en Perse,

Mém_., t. i, pi. ix.

In the Palace Tell Capt. Cros has sunk a series of deep shafts to

determine precisely the relations which the buildings of Ur-Bau and

Gudea, found already on this part of the site, bear to each other, and

to the building of Adad-nadin-akhê, which had been erected there at

a much later period. Prom this slight sketch of the work carried out

during the last two years at Telloh it will have been seen that the

Prench mission in Chaldæa is at present engaged in excavations of a

most important character, which are being conducted in a regular and

scientific manner. As the area of the excavations marks the site of the

chief city of the Sumerians, the diggings there have yielded and

are yielding material of the greatest interest and value for the

reconstruction of the early history of Chaldæa. After briefly describing

the character and results of other recent excavations in Mesopotamia and

the neighbouring lands, we will return to the discoveries at Telloh and

sketch the new information they supply on the history of the earliest

inhabitants of the country.

Another French mission that is carrying out work of the very greatest

interest to the student of early Babylonian history is that which is

excavating at Susa in Persia, under the direction of M. J. de Morgan,

whose work on the prehistoric and early dynastic sites in Egypt has

already been described. M. de Morgan’s first season’s digging at Susa

was carried out in the years 1897-8, and the success with which he met

from the very first, when cutting trenches in the mound which marks

the acropolis of the ancient city, has led him to concentrate his main

efforts in this part of the ruins ever since. Provisional trenches cut

in the part of the ruins called “the Royal City,” and in others of the

mounds at Susa, indicate that many remains may eventually be found there

dating from the period of the Achæmenian Kings of Persia. But it is in

the mound of the acropolis at Susa that M. de Morgan has found monuments

of the greatest historical interest and value, not only in the history

of ancient Elam, but also in that of the earliest rulers of Chaldæa.

In the diggings carried out during the first season’s work on the site,

an obelisk was found inscribed on four sides with a long text of some

sixty-nine columns, written in Semitic Babylonian by the orders

of Manishtusu, a very early Semitic king of the city of Kish in

Babylonia.[* See illustration.] The text records the purchase by the

King of Kish of immense tracts of land situated at Kish and in

its neighbourhood, and its length is explained by the fact that it

enumerates full details of the size and position of each estate, and the

numbers and some of the names of the dwellers on the estates who were

engaged in their cultivation. After details have been given of a number

of estates situated in the same neighbourhood, a summary is appended

referring to the whole neighbourhood, and the fact is recorded that the

district dealt with in the preceding catalogue and summary had been duly

acquired by purchase by Manishtusu, King of Kish. The long text upon

the obelisk is entirely taken up with details of the purchase of the

territory, and therefore its subject has not any great historical value.

Mention is made in it of two personages, one of whom may possibly

be identified with a Babylonian ruler whose name is known from other

sources. If the proposed identification t should prove to be correct,

it would enable us to assign a more precise date to Manishtusu than has

hitherto been possible. One of the personages in question was a certain

Urukagina, the son of Engilsa, patesi of Shirpurla, and it has been

suggested that he is the same Urukagina who is known to have occupied

the throne of Shirpurla, though this identification would bring

Manishtusu down somewhat later than is probable from the general

character of his inscriptions. The other personage mentioned in the text

is the son of Manishtusu, named Mesalim, and there is more to be said

for the identification of this prince with Mesilim, the early King of

Kish, who reigned at a period anterior to that of Eannadu, patesi of

Shirpurla.

The mere fact of so large and important an obelisk, inscribed with a

Semitic text by an early Babylonian king, being found at Susa was

an indication that other monuments of even greater interest might be

forthcoming from the same spot; and this impression was intensified when

a stele of victory was found bearing an inscription of Naram-Sin, the

early Semitic King of Agade, who reigned about 3750 B.C. One face of

this stele is sculptured with a representation of the king conquering

his enemies in a mountainous country. [* See illustration.] The king

himself wears a helmet adorned with the horns of a bull, and he carries

his battle-axe and his bow and an arrow. He is nearly at the summit of

a high mountain, and up its steep sides, along paths through the

trees which clothe the mountain, climb his allies and warriors bearing

standards and weapons. The king’s enemies are represented suing for

mercy as they turn to fly before him. One grasps a broken spear, while

another, crouching before the king, has been smitten in the throat by an

arrow from the king’s bow. On the plain surface of the stele above the

king’s head may be seen traces of an inscription of Narâm-Sin engraved

in three columns in the archaic characters of his period. From the few

signs of the text that remain, we gather that Narâm-Sin had conducted

a campaign with the assistance of certain allied princes, including the

Princes of Sidur, Saluni, and Lulubi, and it is not improbable that

they are to be identified with the warriors represented on the stele as

climbing the mountain behind Narâm-Sin.

In reference to this most interesting stele of Narâm-Sin we may here

mention another inscription of this king, found quite recently at

Susa and published only this year, which throws additional light on

Narâm-Sin’s allies and on the empire which he and his father Sargon

founded. The new inscription was engraved on the base of a diorite

statue, which had been broken to pieces so that only the base with

a portion of the text remained. From this inscription we learn that

Narâm-Sin was the head of a confederation of nine chief allies, or

vassal princes, and waged war on his enemies with their assistance.

Among these nine allies of course the Princes of Sidur, Saluni, and

Lulubi are to be included. The new text further records that Narâm-Sin

made an expedition against Magan (the Sinaitic peninsula), and defeated

Manium, the lord of that region, and that he cut blocks of stone in the

mountains there and transported them to his city of Agade, where

from one of them he made the statue on the base of which the text was

inscribed. It was already known from the so-called “Omens of Sargon

and Narâm-Sin” (a text inscribed on a clay tablet from Ashur-bani-pal’s

library at Nineveh which associates the deeds of these two early rulers

with certain augural phenomena) that Narâm-Sin had made an expedition

to Sinai in the course of his reign and had conquered the king of the

country. The new text gives contemporary confirmation of this assertion

and furnishes us with additional information with regard to the name of

the conquered ruler of Sinai and other details of the campaign.

That monuments of such great interest to the early history of Chaldæa

should have been found at Susa in Persia was sufficiently startling,

but an easy explanation was at first forthcoming from the fact that

Narâm-Sin’s stele of victory had been used by the later Elamite king,

Shutruk-Nakhkhunte, for an inscription of his own; this he had engraved

in seven long lines along the great cone in front of Narâm-Sin, which is

probably intended to represent the peak of the mountain. From the fact

that it had been used in this way by Shutruk-Nakhkhunte, it seemed

permissible to infer that it had been captured in the course of a

campaign and brought to Susa as a trophy of war. But we shall see later

on that the existence of early Babylonian inscriptions and monuments in

the mound of the acropolis at Susa is not to be explained in this way,

but was due to the wide extension of both Sumerian and Semitic influence

throughout Western Asia from the very earliest periods. This subject

will be treated more fully in the chapter dealing with the early history

of Blam.

The upper surface of the tell of the acropolis at Susa for a depth of

nearly two metres contains remains of the buildings and antiquities

of the Achæmenian kings and others of both later and earlier dates.

In these upper strata of the mound are found remains of the

Arab, Sassanian, Parthian, Seleucian, and Persian periods, mixed

indiscriminately with one another and with Elamite objects and materials

of all ages, from that of the earliest patesis down to that of the

Susian kings of the seventh century B.C.

[Illustration: 160.jpg BABIL.]

The most northern of the mounds which now mark the site of

the ancient city of Babylon; used for centuries as a quarry

for building materials.

The reason of this mixture of the remains of many races and periods is

that the later builders on the mound made use of the earlier building

materials which they found preserved within it. Along the skirts of the

mound may still be seen the foundations of the wall which formed the

principal defence of the acropolis in the time of Xerxes, and in many

places not only are the foundations preserved but large pieces of the

wall itself still rise above the surface of the soil.

[Illustration: 160a.jpg “STELE OF VICTORY”]

[Illustration: 160a-text.jpg TEXT FOR “STELE OF VICTORY”]

Stele of Narâm-Sin, an early Semitic King of Agade in

Babylonia, who reigned about B. C. 3750. From the photograph

by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

The plan of the wall is quite irregular, following the contours of the

mound, and, though it is probable that the wall was strengthened and

defended at intervals by towers, no trace of these now remains. The

wall is very thick and built of unburnt bricks, and the system of

fortification seems to have been extremely simple at this period.

[Illustration: 161.jpg ROUGHLY HEWN SCULPTURE OF A LION STANDING OVER A

FALLEN MAN, FOUND AT BABYLON.]

The group probably represents Babylon or the Babylonian king

triumphing over the country’s enemies. The Arabs regard the

figure as an evil spirit, and it is pitted with the marks of

bullets shot at it. They also smear it with filth when they

can do so unobserved; in the photograph some newly smeared

filth may be seen adhering to the side of the lion.

The earlier citadel or fortress of the city of Susa was built at the top

of the mound and must have been a more formidable stronghold than that

of the Achæmenian kings, for, besides its walls, it had the additional

protection of the steep slopes of the mound.

Below the depth of two metres from the surface of the mound are found

strata in which Elamite objects and materials are, no longer mixed with

the remains of later ages, but here the latest Elamite remains are found

mingled with objects and materials dating from the earliest periods of

Elam’s history. The use of un-burnt bricks as the principal material

for buildings erected on the mound in all ages has been another cause

of this mixture of materials, for it has little power of resistance to

water, and a considerable rain-storm will wash away large portions

of the surface and cause the remains of different strata to be mixed

indiscriminately with one another. In proportion as the trenches were

cut deeper into the mound the strata which were laid bare showed remains

of earlier ages than those in the upper layers, though here also remains

of different periods are considerably mixed. The only building that has

hitherto been discovered at Susa by M. de Morgan, the ground plan of

which was in a comparatively good state of preservation, was a small

temple of the god Shu-shinak, and this owed its preservation to the

fact that it was not built of unburnt brick, but was largely composed of

burnt brick and plaques and tiles of enamelled terra-cotta.

But although the diggings of M. de Morgan at Susa have so far afforded

little information on the subject of Elamite architecture, the separate

objects found have enabled us to gain considerable knowledge of the

artistic achievements of the race during the different periods of

its existence. Moreover, the stelæ and stone records that have been

recovered present a wealth of material for the study of the long history

of Elam and of the kings who ruled in Babylonia during the earliest

ages.

[Illustration: 163.jpg GENERAL VIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS ON THE KASR AT

BABYLON.]

Showing the depth in the mound to which the diggings are

carried.

The most famous of M. de Morgan’s recent finds is the long code of

laws drawn up by Hammurabi, the greatest king of the First Dynasty of

Babylon.[1] This was engraved upon a huge block of black diorite, and

was found in the tell of the acropolis in the winter of 1901-2. This

document in itself has entirely revolutionized current theories as to

the growth and origin of the principal ancient legal codes. It proves

that Babylonia was the fountainhead from which many later races borrowed

portions of their legislative systems. Moreover, the subjects dealt

with in this code of laws embrace most of the different classes of the

Babylonian people, and it regulates their duties and their relations

to one another in their ordinary occupations and pursuits. It therefore

throws much light upon early Babylonian life and customs, and we shall

return to it in the chapter dealing with these subjects.

[1] It will be noted that the Babylonian dynasties are

referred to throughout this volume as “First Dynasty,”

“Second Dynasty,” “Third Dynasty,” etc. They are thus

distinguished from the Egyptian dynasties, the order of

which is indicated by Roman numerals, e.g. “Ist Dynasty,”

“IId Dynasty,” “IIId Dynasty.”

The American excavators at Nippur, under the direction of Mr. Haynes,

have done much in the past to increase our knowledge of Sumerian and

early Babylonian history, but the work has not been continued in

recent years, and, unfortunately, little progress has been made in the

publication of the material already accumulated. In fact, the leadership

in American excavation has passed from the University of Pennsylvania to

that of Chicago. This progressive university has sent out an expedition,

under the general direction of Prof. R. F. Harper (with Dr. E. J. Banks

as director of excavations), which is doing excellent work at Bismya,

and, although it is too early yet to expect detailed accounts of their

achievements, it is clear that they have already met with considerable

success. One of their recent finds consists of a white marble statue of

an early Sumerian king named Daudu, which was set up in the temple of

E-shar in the city of Udnun, of which he was ruler. From its archaic

style of workmanship it may be placed in the earliest period of Sumerian

history, and may be regarded as an earnest of what may be expected to

follow from the future labours of Prof. Harper’s expedition.

[Illustration: 165.jpg WITHIN THE PALACE OF NEBUCHADNEZZAR II.]

At Fâra and at Abû Hatab in Babylonia, the Deutsch-Orient Gesellschaft,

under Dr. Koldewey’s direction, has excavated Sumerian and Babylonian

remains of the early period. At the former site they unearthed the

remains of many private houses and found some Sumerian tablets of

accounts and commercial documents, but little of historical interest;

and an inscription, which seems to have come from Abu Hatab, probably

proves that the Sumerian name of the city whose site it marks was

Kishurra. But the main centre of German activity in Babylonia is the

city of Babylon itself, where for the last seven years Dr. Koldewey has

conducted excavations, unearthing the palaces of Nebuchadnezzar II on

the mound termed the Kasr, identifying the temple of E-sagila under the

mound called Tell Amran ibn-Ali, tracing the course of the sacred way

between E-sagila and the palace-mound, and excavating temples dedicated

to the goddess Ninmakh and the god Ninib.

[Illustration: 166.jpg EXCAVATIONS IN THE TEMPLE OP NINIB AT BABYLON.]

In the middle distance may be seen the metal trucks running

on light rails which are employed on the work for the

removal of the débris from the diggings.

Dr. Andrae, Dr. Koldewey’s assistant, has also completed the excavation

of the temple dedicated to Nabû at Birs Nimrud. On the principal mound

at this spot, which marks the site of the ancient city of Borsippa,

traces of the ziggurat, or temple tower, may still be seen rising from

the soil, the temple of Nabû lying at a lower level below the steep

slope of the mound, which is mainly made up of débris from the

ziggurat. Dr. Andrae has recently left Babylonia for Assyria, where

his excavations at Sher-ghat, the site of the ancient Assyrian city of

Ashur, are confidently expected to throw considerable light on the early

history of that country and the customs of the people, and already he

has made numerous finds of considerable interest.

[Illustration: 167.jpg THE PRINCIPAL MOUND OF BIRS NIMRUD, WHICH MARKS

THE SITE OP THE ANCIENT CITY OP BORSIPPA.]

Since the early spring of 1903 excavations have been conducted at

Kuyunjik, the site of the city of Nineveh, by Messrs. L. W. King and R.

C. Thompson on behalf of the Trustees of the British Museum, and have

resulted in the discovery of many early remains in the lower strata of

the mound, in addition to the finding of new portions of the two palaces

already known and partly excavated, the identification of a third

palace, and the finding of an ancient temple dedicated to Nabû, whose

existence had already been inferred from a study of the Assyrian

inscriptions.[2] All these diggings at Babylon, at Ashur, and at Nineveh

throw more light upon the history of the country during the Assyrian and

Neo-Babylonian periods, and will be referred to later in the volume.

[2] It may be noted that excavations are also being actively

carried on in Palestine at the present time. Mr. Macalister

has for some years been working for the Palestine

Exploration Fund at Gezer; Dr. Schumacher is digging at

Megiddo for the German Palestine Society; and Prof. Sellin

is at present excavating at Taanach (Ta’annak) and will

shortly start work at Dothan. Good work on remains of later

historical periods is also being carried on under the

auspices of the Deutsch-Orient Gesellschaft at Ba’albek and

in Galilee. It would be tempting to include here a summary

of the very interesting results that have recently been

achieved in this fruitful field of archaeological research,

for it is true that these excavations may strictly be said

to bear on the history of a portion of Western Asia. But the

problems which they raise would more naturally be discussed

in a work dealing with recent excavation and research in

relation to the Bible, and to have summarized them

adequately would have increased the size of the present

volume considerably beyond its natural limits. They have

therefore not been included within the scope of the present

work.

[Illustration: 168.jpg THE PRINCIPAL MOUND AT SHERGHAT, WHICH MARKS THE

SITE OF ASHUK, THE ANCIENT CAPITAL OF THE ASSYRIANS.]

Meanwhile, we will return to the diggings described at the beginning

of this chapter, as affording new information concerning the earliest

periods of Chaldæan history.

A most interesting inscription has recently been discovered by Capt.

Cros at Telloh, which throws considerable light on the rivalry which

existed between the cities of Shirpurla and Gishkhu, and at the same

time furnishes valuable material for settling the chronology of the

earliest rulers whose inscriptions have been found at Mppur and their

relations to contemporary rulers in Shirpurla.

[Illustration: 169.jpg THE MOUND OF KUYUNJIK, WHICH FORMED ONE OF THE

PALACE MOUNDS OF THE ANCIENT ASSYRIAN CITY OF NINEVEH.]

The cities of Gishkhu and Shirpurla were probably situated not far from

one another, and their rivalry is typical of the history of the early

city-states of Babylonia. The site of the latter city, as has already

been said, is marked by the mounds of Telloh on the east bank of the

Shatt el-Hai, the natural stream joining the Tigris and Euphrates, which

has been improved and canalized by the dwellers in Southern Babylonia

from the earliest period.

[Illustration: 170.jpg WINGED BULL IN THE PALACE OF SENNACHERIB ON

KUYUNJIK, THE PRINCIPAL MOUND MARKING THE SITE OF NINEVEH.]

The site of Gishkhu may be set with considerable probability not far to

the north of Telloh on the opposite bank of the Shatt el-Hai. These

two cities, situated so close to one another, exercised considerable

political influence, and though less is known of Gishkhu than of

the more famous Babylonian cities such as Ur, Brech, and Larsam, her

proximity to Shirpurla gave her an importance which she might not

otherwise have possessed. The earliest knowledge we possess of the

relations existing between Gishkhu and Shirpurla refers to the reign of

Mesilim, King of Kish, the period of whose rule may be provisionally set

before that of Sargon of Agade, i.e, about 4000 B.C.

At this period there was rivalry between the two cities, in consequence

of which Mesilim, King of Kish, was called in as arbitrator. A record of

the treaty of delimitation that was drawn up on this occasion has been

preserved upon the recently discovered cone of Entemena. This document

tells us that at the command of the god Enlil, described as “the king

of the countries,” Ningirsu, the chief god of Shirpurla, and the god of

Gishkhu decided to draw up a line of division between their respective

territories, and that Mesilim, King of Kish, acting under the direction

of his own god Kadi, marked out the frontier and set up a stele between

the two territories to commemorate the fixing of the boundary.

This policy of fixing the boundary by arbitration seems to have been

successful, and to have secured peace between Shirpurla and Gishkhu

for some generations. But after a period which cannot be accurately

determined a certain patesi of Gishkhu, named Ush, was filled with

ambition to extend his territory at the expense of Shirpurla. He

therefore removed the stele which Mesilim had set up, and, invading the

plain of Shirpurla, succeeded in conquering and holding a district named

Gu-edin. But Ush’s successful raid was not of any permanent benefit to

his city, for he was in his turn defeated by the forces of Shirpurla,

and his successor upon the throne, a patesi named Enakalli, abandoned a

policy of aggression, and concluded with Eannadu, patesi of Shirpurla, a

solemn treaty concerning the boundary between their realms, the text of

which has been preserved to us upon the famous Stele of Vultures in the

Louvre.[3]

[3] A fragment of this stele is also preserved in the British

Museum. It is published in Cuneiform Texts in the British

Museum, Pt. vii.

According to this treaty Gu-edin was restored to Shirpurla, and a deep

ditch was dug between the two territories which should permanently

indicate the line of demarcation. The stele of Mesilim was restored to

its place, and a second stele was inscribed and set up as a memorial

of the new treaty. Enakalli did not negotiate the treaty on equal terms

with Eannadu, for he only secured its ratification by consenting to pay

heavy tribute in grain for the supply of the great temples of Nin-girsu

and Ninâ in Shirpurla. It would appear that under Eannadu the power

and influence of Shirpurla were extended over the whole of Southern

Babylonia, and reached even to the borders of Elam. At any rate, it is

clear that during his lifetime the city of Gishkhu was content to remain

in a state of subjection to its more powerful neighbour. But it was

always ready to seize any opportunity of asserting itself and of

attempting to regain its independence.

[Illustration: 172.jpg CLAY MEMORIAL-TABLET OF EANNADU.]

The characters of the inscription well illustrate the

pictorial origin of the Sumerian system of writing.

Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

Accordingly, after Eannadu’s death the men of Gishkhu again took the

offensive. At this time Urlumma, the son and successor of Enakalli, was

on the throne of Gishkhu, and he organized the forces of the city

and led them out to battle. His first act was to destroy the frontier

ditches named after Ningirsu and Ninâ, the principal god and goddess of

Shirpurla, which Eannadu, the powerful foe of Gishkhu, had caused to be

dug. He then tore down the stele on which the terms of Eannadu’s treaty

had been engraved and broke it into pieces by casting it into the fire,

and the shrines which Eannadu had built near the frontier, and had

consecrated to the gods of Shirpurla, he razed to the ground. But

again Shirpurla in the end proved too strong for Gishkhu. The ruler

in Shirpurla at this time was Enannadu, who had succeeded his brother

Eannadu upon the throne. He marched out to meet the invading forces

of the men of Gishkhu, and a battle was fought in the territory of

Shirpurla. According to one account, the forces of Shirpurla were

victorious, while on the cone of Ente-mena no mention is made of

the issue of the combat. The result may not have been decisive, but

Enannadu’s action at least checked Urlumma’s encroachments for the time.

It would appear that the death of the reigning patesi in Shirpurla was

always the signal for an attack upon that city by the men of Gishkhu.

They may have hoped that the new ruler would prove a less successful

leader than the last, or that the accession of a new monarch might give

rise to internal dissensions in the city which would weaken Shirpurla’s

power of resisting a sudden attack. As Eannadu’s death had encouraged

Urlumma to lead out the men of Gishkhu, so the death of Enannadu seemed

to him a good opportunity to make another bid for victory. But this time

the result of the battle was not indecisive. Entemena had succeeded his

father Enannadu, and he led out to victory the forces of Shir-purla. The

battle was fought near the canal Lumma-girnun-ta, and when the men of

Gishkhu were put to flight they left sixty of their fellows lying dead

upon the banks of the canal. Entemena tells us that the bones of these

warriors were left to bleach in the open plain, but he seems to have

buried those of the men of Gishkhu who fell in the pursuit, for he

records that in five separate places he piled up burial-mounds in which

the bodies of the slain were interred. Entemena was not content with

merely inflicting a defeat upon the army of Gishkhu and driving it back

within its own borders, for he followed up his initial advantage and

captured the capital itself. He deposed and imprisoned Urlumma, and

chose one of his own adherents to rule as patesi of Gishkhu in his

stead. The man he appointed for this high office was named Hi, and he

had up to that time been priest in Ninâb. Entemena summoned him to his

presence, and, after marching in a triumphal procession from Girsu

in the neighbourhood of Shirpurla to the conquered city, proceeded to

invest him with the office of patesi of Gishkhu.

Entemena also repaired the frontier ditches named after Ningirsu and

Ninâ, which had been employed for purposes of irrigation as well as for

marking the frontier; and he gave instructions to Hi to employ the men

dwelling in the district of Karkar on this work, as a punishment for

the active part they had taken in the recent raid into the territory of

Shirpurla. Entemena also restored and extended the system of canals

in the region between the Tigris and the Euphrates, lining one of the

principal channels with stone.

[Illustration: 175.jpg MARBLE GATE]

Marble Gate-Socket Bearing An Inscription Of Entemena, A Powerful

Patesi, Or Viceroy, Of Shirpurla.

In the photograph the gate-socket is resting on its side so as to

show the inscription, but when in use it was set flat upon the

ground and partly buried below the level of the pavement of the

building in which it was used. It was fixed at the side of a

gateway and the pivot of the heavy gate revolved in the shallow

hole or depression in its centre. As stone is not found in the

alluvial soil of Babylonia, the blocks for gate-sockets had to be

brought from great distances and they were consequently highly

prized. The kings and patesis who used them in their buildings

generally had their names and titles engraved upon them, and they

thus form a valuable class of inscriptions for the study of the

early history. Photograph by Messrs. Man-sell & Co.

He thus added greatly to the wealth of Shirpurla by increasing the area

of territory under cultivation, and he continued to exercise authority

in Gishkhu by means of officers appointed by himself. A record of his

victory over Gishkhu was inscribed by Entemena upon a number of clay

cones, that the fame of it might be preserved in future days to the

honour of Ningirsu and the goddess Ninâ. He ends this record with a

prayer for the preservation of the frontier. If ever in time to come the

men of Gishkhu should break out across the frontier-ditch of Ningirsu,

or the frontier-ditch of Ninâ, in order to seize or lay waste the lands

of Shirpurla, whether they be men of the city of Gishkhu itself or men

of the mountains, he prays that Enlil may destroy them and that Ningirsu

may lay his curse upon them; and if ever the warriors of his own city

should be called upon to defend it, he prays that they may be full of

courage and ardour for their task.

The greater part of this information with regard to the struggles

between Gishkhu and Shirpurla, between the period of Mesilim, King of

Kish, and that of Entemena, is supplied by the inscription of the latter

ruler which has been found written around a small cone of clay. There is

little doubt that the text was also engraved by the orders of Entemena

upon a stone stele which was set up, like those of Mesilim and Eannadu,

upon the frontier. Other copies of the inscription were probably

engraved and erected in the cities of Gishkhu and Shirpurla, and to

ensure the preservation of the record Entemena probably had numerous

copies of it made upon small cones of clay which were preserved and

possibly buried in the structure of the temples of Shirpurla. Entemena’s

foresight in this matter has been justified by results, for, while his

great memorials of stone have perished, the preservation of one of his

small cones has sufficed to make known to later ages his own and his

forefathers’ prowess in their continual contests with their ancient rival

Gishkhu.

After the reign of Entemena we have little information with regard to

the relations between Gishkhu and Shirpurla, though it is probable that

the effects of his decisive victory continued to exercise a moderating

influence on Gishkhu’s desire for expansion and secured a period

of peaceful development for Shirpurla without the continual fear of

encroachments on the part of her turbulent neighbour. We may assume that

this period of tranquillity continued during the reigns of Enannadu II,

Enlitarzi, and Lugal-anda, but, when in the reign of Urukagina the men

of Gishkhu once more emerge from their temporary obscurity, they appear

as the authors of deeds of rapine and bloodshed committed on a scale

that was rare even in that primitive age.

In the earlier stages of their rivalry Gishkhu had always been defeated,

or at any rate checked, in her actual conflicts with Shirpurla. When

taking the aggressive the men of Gishkhu seem generally to have confined

themselves to the seizure of territory, such as the district of Gu-edin,

which was situated on the western bank of the Shaft el-Hai and divided

from their own lands only by the frontier-ditch. If they ever actually

crossed the Shaft el-Hai and raided the lands on its eastern bank, they

never ventured to attack the city of Shirpurla itself. And, although

their raids were attended with some success in their initial stages, the

ruling patesis of Shirpurla were always strong enough to check them; and

on most occasions they carried the war into the territory of Gishkhu,

with the result that they readjusted the boundary on their own terms.

But it would appear that all these primitive Chalæan cities were subject

to alternate periods of expansion and defeat, and Shirpurla was not an

exception to the rule. It was probably not due so much to Urukagina’s

personal qualities or defects as a leader that Shirpurla suffered

the greatest reverse in her history during his reign, but rather to

Gishkhu’s gradual increase in power at a time when Shirpurla herself

remained inactive, possibly lulled into a false sense of security by the

memory of her victories in the past. Whatever may have been the cause of

Gishkhu’s final triumph, it is certain that it took place in Urukagina’s

reign, and that for many years afterwards the hegemony of Southern

Babylonia remained in her hands, while Shirpurla for a long period

passed completely out of existence as an independent or semi-independent

state.

The evidence of the catastrophe that befell Shirpurla at this period is

furnished by a small clay tablet recently found at Telloh during Captain

Cros’s excavations on that site. The document on which the facts in

question are recorded had no official character, and in all probability

it had not been stored in any library or record chamber. The actual spot

at Telloh where it was found was to the north of the mound in which

the most ancient buildings have been recovered, and at the depth of two

metres below the surface. No other tablets appear to have been found

near it, but that fact in itself would not be sufficient evidence on

which to base any theory as to its not having originally formed part of

the archives of the city. Its unofficial character is attested by the

form of the tablet and the manner in which the information upon it is

arranged. In shape there is little to distinguish the document from the

tablets of accounts inscribed in the reign of Urukagina, great numbers

of which have been found recently at Telloh. Roughly square in shape,

its edges are slightly convex, and the text is inscribed in a series of

narrow columns upon both the obverse and the reverse. The text itself

is not a carefully arranged composition, such as are the votive and

historical inscriptions of early Sumerian rulers. It consists of a

series of short sentences enumerating briefly and without detail the

separate deeds of violence and sacrilege performed by the men of Gishkhu

after their capture of the city. It is little more than a catalogue or

list of the shrines and temples destroyed during the sack of the city,

or defiled by the blood of the men of Shirpurla who were slain therein.

No mention is made in the list of the palace of the Urukagina, or of any

secular building, or of the dwellings of the citizens themselves. There

is little doubt that these also were despoiled and destroyed by the

victorious enemy, but the writer of the tablet is not concerned for the

moment with the fate of his city or his fellow citizens. He appears to

be overcome with the thought of the deeds of sacrilege committed against

his gods; his mind is entirely taken up with the magnitude of the

insult offered to the god Ningirsu, the city-god of Shirpurla. His bare

enumeration of the deeds of sacrilege and violence loses little by its

brevity, and, when he has ended the list of his accusations against the

men of Gishkhu, he curses the goddess to whose influence he attributes

their success.

No composition at all like this document has yet been recovered, and as

it is not very long we may here give a translation of the text. It will

be seen that the writer plunges at once into the subject of his

charges against the men of Gishkhu. No historical _résumé_ prefaces

his accusations, and he gives no hint of the circumstances that have

rendered their delivery possible. The temples of his city have been

profaned and destroyed, and his indignation finds vent in a mere

enumeration of their titles. To his mind the facts need no comment,

for to him it is barely conceivable that such sacred places of ancient

worship should have been defiled. He launches his indictment against

Gishkhu in the following terms: “The men of Gishkhu have set fire to the

temple of E-ki [... ], they have set fire to Antashura, and they have

carried away the silver and the precious stones therefrom! They have

shed blood in the palace of Tirash, they have shed blood in Abzubanda,

they have shed blood in the shrine of Enlil and in the shrine of the

Sun-god, they have shed blood in Akhush, and they have carried away the

silver and the precious stones therefrom! They have shed blood in the

Gikana of the sacred grove of the goddess Ninmakh, and they have carried

away the silver and the precious stones therefrom! They have shed blood

in Baga, and they have carried away the silver and the precious stones

therefrom! They have shed blood in Abzu-ega, they have set fire to

the temple of Gatumdug, and they have carried away the silver and the

precious stones therefrom, and have destroyed her statue! They have set

fire to the.... of the temple E-anna of the goddess Ninni, and they

have carried away the silver and the precious stones therefrom, and have

destroyed her statue! They have shed blood in Shapada, and they have

carried away the silver and precious stones therefrom! They have....

in Khenda, they have shed blood in the temple of Nindar in the town

of Kiab, and they have carried away the silver and the precious stones

therefrom! They have set fire to the temple of Dumuzi-abzu in the town

of Kinunir, and they have carried away the silver and the precious

stones therefrom! They have set fire to the temple of Lugaluru, and they

have carried away the silver and the precious stones therefrom! They

have shed blood in E-engura, the temple of the goddess Ninâ, and they

have carried away the silver and the precious stones therefrom! They

have shed blood in Sag..., the temple of Amageshtin, and the silver

and the precious stones of Amageshtin have they carried away! They have

removed the grain from Ginarbaniru, the field of the god Ningirsu,

so much of it as was under cultivation! The men of Gishkhu, by the

despoiling of Shirpurla, have committed a transgression against the god

Ningirsu! The power that is come unto them, from them shall be taken

away! Of transgression on the part of Urukagina, King of Girsu, there

is none. As for Lugalzaggisi, patesi of Gishkhu, may his goddess Ni-daba

bear on her head (the weight of) this transgression!”

Such is the account, which has come down to us from the rough tablet of

some unknown scribe, of the greatest misfortune experienced by Shirpurla

during the long course of her history. Many of the great temples

mentioned in the text as among those which were burnt down and despoiled

of their treasures are referred to more than once in the votive and

historical inscriptions of earlier rulers of Shirpurla, who occupied the

throne before the ill-fated Urukagina. The names of some of them, too,

are to be found in the texts of the later pate-sis of that city, so

that it may be concluded that in course of time they were rebuilt and

restored to their former splendour. But there is no doubt that the

despoiling and partial destruction of Shirpurla in the reign of

Urukagina had a lasting effect upon the fortunes of that city, and

effectively curtailed her influence among the greater cities of Southern

Babylonia.

We may now turn our attention to the leader of the men of Gishkhu, under

whose direction they achieved their final triumph over their ancient,

and for long years more powerful, rival Shirpurla. The writer of our

tablet mentions his name in the closing words of his text when he curses

him and his goddess for the destruction and sacrilege that they have

wrought. “As for Lugalzaggisi,” he says, “patesi of Gishkhu, may his

goddess Nidaba bear on her head (the weight of ) this transgression!”

Now the name of Lugalzaggisi has been found upon a number of fragments

of vases made of white calcite stalagmite which were discovered by Mr.

Haynes during his excavations at Nippur. All the vases were engraved

with the same inscription, so that it was possible by piecing the

fragments of text together to obtain a more or less complete copy of

the records which were originally engraved upon each of them. From

these records we learned for the first time, not only the name of

Lugalzaggisi, but the fact that he founded a powerful coalition of

cities in Babylonia at what was obviously a very early period in the

history of the country. In the text he describes himself as “King of

Erech, king of the world, the priest of Ana, the hero of Nidaba, the

son of Ukush, patesi of Gishkhu, the hero of Nidaba, the man who was

favourably regarded by the sure eye of the King of the Lands (i.e.

the god Enlil), the great patesi of Enlil, unto whom understanding was

granted by Enki, the chosen of the Sun-god, the exalted minister of

Enzu, endowed with strength by the Sun-god, the worshipper of Ninni, the

son who was conceived by Nidaba, who was nourished by Ninkharsag with

the milk of life, the attendant of Umu, priestess of Erech, the servant

who was trained by Ninâgidkhadu, the mistress of Erech, the great

minister of the gods.” Lugalzaggisi then goes on to describe the extent

of his dominion, and he says: “When the god Enlil, the lord of the

countries, bestowed upon Lugalzaggisi the kingdom of the world, and

granted unto him success in the sight of the world, when he filled the

lands with his power, and conquered them from the rising of the sun unto

the setting of the same, at that time he made straight his path from the

Lower Sea of the Tigris and Euphrates unto the Upper Sea, and he granted

him dominion over all from the rising of the sun unto the setting of the

same, so that he caused the lands to dwell in peace.”

Now when first the text of this inscription was published there existed

only vague indications of the date to be assigned to Lugalzaggisi and

the kingdom that he founded. It was clear from the titles which he bore,

that, though Gishkhu was his native place, he had extended his authority

far beyond that city and had chosen Erech as his capital. Moreover,

he claimed an empire extending from “the Lower Sea of the Tigris and

Euphrates unto the Upper Sea.” There is no doubt that the Lower Sea here

mentioned is the Persian Gulf, and it has been suggested that the Upper

Sea may be taken to be the Mediterranean, though it may possibly have

been Lake Van or Lake Urmi. But whichever of these views might be

adopted, it was clear that Lugalzaggisi was a great conqueror, and had

achieved the right to assume the high-sounding title of lugal halama,

“king of the world.” In these circumstances it was of the first

importance for the study of primitive Chaldæan history and chronology

to ascertain approximately the period at which Lugalzaggisi reigned.

The evidence on which such a question could be provisionally settled was

of the vaguest and most uncertain character, but such as it was it

had to suffice, in the absence of more reliable data. In settling all

problems connected with early Chaldæan chronology, the starting-point

was, and in fact still is, the period of Sargon I, King of Agade,

inasmuch as the date of his reign is settled, according to the reckoning

of the scribes of Nabonidus, as about 3800 B.C. It is true that this

date has been called in question, and ingenious suggestions for amending

it have been made by some writers, while others have rejected it

altogether, holding that it merely represented a guess on the part of

the late Babylonians and could be safely ignored in the chronological

schemes which they brought forward. But nearly every fresh discovery

made in the last few years has tended to confirm some point in the

traditions current among the later Babylonians with regard to the

earlier history of their country. Consequently, reliance may be placed

with increased confidence on the truth of such traditions as a

whole, and we may continue to accept those statements which yet await

confirmation from documents more nearly contemporary with the early

period to which they refer. It is true that such a date as that assigned

by Nabonidus to Sargon is not to be regarded as absolutely fixed, for

Nabonidus is obviously speaking in round numbers, and we may allow for

some minor inaccuracies in the calculations of his scribes. But it is

certain that the later Babylonian priests and scribes had a wealth of

historical material at their disposal which has not come down to us. We

may therefore accept the date given by Nabonidus for Sargon of Agade

and his son Narâm-Sin as approximately accurate, and this is also the

opinion of the majority of writers on early Babylonian history.

The diggings at Nippur furnished indications that certain inscriptions

found on that site and written in a very archaic form of script were

to be assigned to a period earlier than that of Sargon. One class of

evidence was obtained from a careful study of the different levels at

which the inscriptions and the remains of buildings were found. At a

comparatively deep level in the mound inscriptions of Sargon himself

were recovered, along with bricks stamped with the name of Narâm-Sin,

his son. It was, therefore, a reasonable conclusion roughly to date the

particular stratum in which these objects were found to the period of

the empire established by Sargon, with its centre at Agade. Later on

excavations were carried to a lower level, and remains of buildings

were discovered which appeared to belong to a still earlier period

of civilization. An altar was found standing in a small enclosure

surrounded by a kind of curb. Near by were two immense clay vases which

appeared to have been placed on a ramp or inclined plane leading up to

the altar, and remains were also found of a massive brick building in

which was an arch of brick. No inscriptions were actually found at this

level, but in the upper level assigned to Sargon were a number of texts

which might very probably be assigned to the pre-Sargonic period. None

of these were complete, and they had the appearance of having been

intentionally broken into small fragments. There was therefore something

to be said for the theory that they might have been inscribed by the

builders of the construction in the lowest levels of the mound, and that

they were destroyed and scattered by some conqueror who had laid their

city in ruins.

But all such evidence derived from noting the levels at which

inscriptions are found is in its nature extremely uncertain and liable

to many different interpretations, especially if the strata show signs

of having been disturbed. Where a pavement or building is still intact,

with the inscribed bricks of the builder remaining in their original

positions, conclusions may be confidently drawn with regard to the age

of the building and its relative antiquity to the strata above and below

it. But the strata in the lowest levels at Nippur, as we have seen, were

not in this condition, and such evidence as they furnished could only be

accepted if confirmed by independent data. Such confirmation was to be

found by examination of the early inscriptions themselves.

It has been remarked that most of them were broken into small pieces,

as though by some invader of the country; but this was not the case with

certain gate-sockets and great blocks of diorite which were too hard

and big to be easily broken. Moreover, any conqueror of a city would be

unlikely to spend time and labour in destroying materials which might

be usefully employed in the construction of other buildings which he

himself might erect. Stone could not be obtained in the alluvial plains

of Babylonia and had to be quarried in the mountains and brought great

distances.

[Illustration: 188.jpg STONE GATE]

Stone Gate-Socket Bearing An Inscription of Uk-Engur, An Early King

of The City Of Ur. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

From any building of his predecessors which he razed to the ground, an

invader would therefore remove the gate-sockets and blocks of stone for

his own use, supposing he contemplated building on the site. If he left

the city in ruins and returned to his own country, some subsequent king,

when clearing the ruined site for building operations, might come across

the stones, and he would not leave them buried, but would use them for

his own construction. And this is what actually did happen in the case

of some of the building materials of one of these early kings, from the

lower strata of Nippur. Certain of the blocks which bore the name of

Lugalkigubnidudu had been used again by Sargon, King of Agade, who

engraved his own name upon them without obliterating the name of the

former king.

It followed that Lugalkigubnidudu belonged to the pre-Sargonic period,

and, although the same conclusive evidence was not forthcoming in the

case of Lugalzag-gisi, he also without much hesitation was set in

this early period, mainly on the strength of the archaic forms of the

characters employed in his inscriptions. In fact, they were held to be

so archaic that, not only was he said to have reigned before Sargon of

Agade, but he was set in the very earliest period of Chaldæan history,

and his empire was supposed to have been contemporaneous with the very

earliest rulers of Shirpurla. The new inscription found by Captain

Cros will cause this opinion to be considerably modified. While it

corroborates the view that Lugalzaggisi is to be set in the pre-Sargonic

period, it proves that he lived and reigned very shortly before him. As

we have already seen, he was the contemporary of Urukagina, who belongs

to the middle period of the history of Shirpurla. Lugalzaggisi’s capture

and sack of the city of Shirpurla was only one of a number of conquests

which he achieved. His father Ukush had been merely patesi of the city

of Gish-khu, but he himself was not content with the restricted sphere

of authority which such a position implied, and he eventually succeeded

in enforcing his authority over the greater part of Babylonia. From

the fact that he styles himself King of Erech, we may conclude that

he removed his capital from Ukush to that city, after having probably

secured its submission by force of arms. In fact, his title of “king of

the world” can only have been won as the result of many victories, and

Captain Cros’s tablet gives us a glimpse of the methods by which he

managed to secure himself against the competition of any rival. The

capture of Shirpurla must have been one of his earliest achievements,

for its proximity to Gish-khu rendered its reduction a necessary

prelude to any more extensive plan of conquest. But the kingdom which

Lugalzaggisi founded cannot have endured long.

Under Sargon of Agade, the Semites gained the upper hand in Babylonia,

and Erech, Grishkhu, and Shirpurla, as well as the other ancient cities

in the land, fell in turn under his domination and formed part of the

extensive empire which he ruled.

Concerning the later rulers of city-states of Babylonia which succeeded

the disruption of the empire founded by Sargon of Agade and consolidated

by Narâm-Sin, his son, the excavations have little to tell us which has

not already been made use of by Prof. Maspero in his history of this

period.[4]

[4] The tablets found at Telloh by the late M. de Sarzec, and

published during his lifetime, fall into two main classes,

which date from different periods in early Chaldæan

history. The great majority belong to the period when the

city of Ur held pre-eminence among the cities of Southern

Babylonia, and they are dated in the reigns of Dungi, Bur-

Sin, Gamil-Sin, and Ine-Sin. The other and smaller

collection belongs to the earlier period of Sargon and

Narâm-Sin; while many of the tablets found in M. de Sarzec’s

last diggings, which were published after his death, are to

be set in the great gap between these two periods. Some of

those recently discovered, which belong to the period of

Dungi, contain memoranda concerning the supply of food for

the maintenance of officials stopping at Shirpurla in the

course of journeys in Babylonia and Elam, and they throw an

interesting light on the close and constant communication

which took place at this time between the great cities of

Mesopotamia and the neighbouring countries.

[Illustration: 190.jpg STATUE OF GUDEA.]

The most famous of the later patesis, or viceroys, of

Shirpurla, the Sumerian city in Southern Babylonia now

marked by the mounds of Telloh. Photograph by Messrs.

Mansell & Co.

Ur, Isin, and,Larsam succeeded one another in the position of leading

city in Babylonia, holding Mppur, Eridu, Erech, Shirpurla, and the other

chief cities in a condition of semi-dependence upon themselves. We may

note that the true reading of the name of the founder of the dynasty

of Ur has now been ascertained from a syllabary to be Ur-Engur; and an

unpublished chronicle in the British Museum relates that his son Dungi

cared greatly for the city of Eridu, but sacked Babylon and carried off

its spoil, together with the treasures from E-sagila, the great temple

of Marduk. Such episodes must have been common at this period when each

city was striving for hegemony. Meanwhile, Shirpurla remained the centre

of Sumerian influence in Babylonia, and her patesis were content to owe

allegiance to so powerful a ruler as Dungi, King of Ur, while at all

times exercising complete authority within their own jurisdiction.

During the most recent diggings that have been carried out at Telloh a

find of considerable value to the history of Sumerian art has been

made. The find is also of great general interest, since it enables us

to identify a portrait of Gudea, the most famous of the later Sumerian

patesis. In the course of excavating the Tell of Tablets Captain Cros

found a little seated statue made of diorite. It was not found in place,

but upside down, and appeared to have been thrown with other débris

scattered in that portion of the mound. On lifting it from the trench it

was seen that the head of the statue was broken off, as is the case

with all the other statues of Gudea found at Telloh. The statue bore an

inscription of Gudea, carefully executed and well preserved, but it

was smaller than other statues of the same ruler that had been

already recovered, and the absence of the head thus robbed it of any

extraordinary interest. On its arrival at the Louvre, M. Léon Heuzey was

struck by its general resemblance to a Sumerian head of diorite formerly

discovered by M. de Sarzec at Telloh, which has been preserved in the

Louvre for many years. On applying the head to the newly found statue,

it was found to fit it exactly, and to complete the monument, and we

are thus enabled to identify the features of Gudea. Prom a photographic

reproduction of this statue, it is seen that the head is larger than

it should be, in proportion to the body, a characteristic which is also

apparent in a small Sumerian statue preserved in the British Museum.

[Illustration: 192.jpg TABLET INSCRIBED IN SUMERIAN WITH DETAILS OF A

SURVEY OF CERTAIN PROPERTY.]

Probably situated in the neighbourhood of Telloh. The

circular shape is very unusual, and appears to have been

used only for survey-tablets. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell

& Co.

Gudea caused many statues of himself to be made out of the hard diorite

which he brought for that purpose from the Sinaitic peninsula, and from

the inscriptions preserved upon them it is possible to ascertain the

buildings in which they were originally placed. Thus one of the statues

previously found was set up in the temple of Ninkharsag, two others in

E-ninnû, the temple of the god Ningirsu, three more in the temple of the

goddess Bau, one in E-anna, the temple of the goddess Ninni, and another

in the temple of Gatumdug. The newly found statue of the king was made

to be set up in the temple erected by Gudea at Girsu in honour of the

god Ningishzida, as is recorded in the inscription engraved on the front

of the king’s robe, which reads as follows:

“In the day when the god Ningirsu, the strong warrior of Enlil, granted

unto the god Ningishzida, the son of Ninâzu, the beloved of the gods,

(the guardianship of) the foundation of the city and of the hills and

valleys, on that day Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla, the just man who

loveth his god, who for his master Ningirsu hath constructed his temple

E-ninnu, called the shining Imgig, and his temple E-pa, the temple

of-the seven zones of heaven, and for the goddess Ninâ, the queen, his

lady, hath constructed the temple Sirara-shum, which riseth higher than

(all) the temples in the world, and hath constructed their temples for

the great gods of Lagash, built for his god Ningishzida his temple in

Girsu. Whosoever shall proclaim the god Ningirsu as his god, even as

I proclaim him, may he do no harm unto the temple of my god! May he

proclaim the name of this temple! May that man be my friend, and may he

proclaim my name! Gudea hath made the statue, and ‘Unto - Gudea - the

- builder - of - the - temple - hath life-been-given hath he called its

name, and he hath brought it into the temple.”

The long name which Gudea gave to the statue, “Unto - Gudea - the -

builder - of - the - temple - hath - life-been-given,” is characteristic

of the practice of the Sumerian patesis, who always gave long and

symbolical names to statues, stelae, and sacred objects dedicated and

set up in their temples. The occasion on which the temple was built, and

this statue erected within it, seems to have been the investiture of

the god Ningishzida with special and peculiar powers, and it possibly

inaugurated his introduction into the pantheon of Shirpurla. Ningishzida

is called in the inscription the son of Ninazu, who was the husband of

the Queen of the Underworld.

In one of his aspects he was therefore probably a god of the underworld

himself, and it is in this character that he was appointed by Ningirsu

as guardian of the city’s foundations. But “the hills and valleys”

(i.e. the open country) were also put under his jurisdiction, so that

in another aspect he was a god of vegetation. It is therefore not

improbable that, like the god Dumuzi, or Tammuz, he was supposed to

descend into the underworld in winter, ascending to the surface of the

earth with the earliest green shoots of vegetation in the spring.*

* Cf. Thureau-Dangin, Rev. d’Assyr., vol. vi. (1904), p. 24.

A most valuable contribution has recently been made to our knowledge of

Sumerian religion and of the light in which these early rulers regarded

the cult and worship of their gods, by the complete interpretation of

the long texts inscribed upon the famous cylinders of Gudea, the patesi

of Shirpurla, which have been preserved for many years in the Louvre.

These two great cylinders of baked clay were discovered by the late M.

de Sarzec so long ago as the year 1877, during the first period of his

diggings at Telloh, and, although the general nature of their contents

has long been recognized, no complete translation of the texts inscribed

upon them had been published until a few months ago. M. Thureau-Dangin,

who has made the early Sumerian texts his special study, has devoted

himself to their interpretation for some years past, and he has just

issued the first part of his monograph upon them. In view of the

importance of the texts and of the light they throw upon the religious

beliefs and practices of the early Sumerians, a somewhat detailed

account of their contents may here be given.

The occasion on which the cylinders were made was the rebuilding by

Gudea of E-ninnû, the great temple of the god Ningirsu, in the city of

Shirpurla. The two cylinders supplement one another, one of them having

been inscribed while the work of construction was still in progress, the

other after the completion of the temple, when the god Ningirsu had been

installed within his shrine with due pomp and ceremony. It would appear

that Southern Babylonia had been suffering from a prolonged drought, and

that the water in the rivers and canals had fallen, so that the crops

had suffered and the country was threatened with famine. Gudea was at a

loss to know by what means he might restore prosperity to his country,

when one night he had a dream, and it was in consequence of this dream

that he eventually erected one of the most sumptuously appointed of

Sumerian temples. By this means he secured the return of Ningirsu’s

favour and that of the other gods, and his country once more enjoyed the

blessings of peace and prosperity.

In the opening words of the first of his cylinders Gudea describes how

the great gods themselves took counsel and decreed that he should build

the temple of E-ninnû and thereby restore to his city the supply of

water it had formerly enjoyed. He records that on the day on which the

destinies were fixed in heaven and upon earth, Enlil, the chief of the

gods, and Ningirsu, the city-god of Shirpurla, held converse. And Enlil,

turning to Ningirsu, said: “In my city that which is fitting is not

done. The stream doth not rise. The stream of Enlil doth not rise. The

high waters shine not, neither do they show their splendour. The stream

of Enlil bringeth not good water like the Tigris. Let the King (i.e.

Ningirsu) therefore proclaim the temple. Let the decrees of the temple

E-ninnû be made illustrious in heaven and upon earth!” The great gods

did not communicate their orders directly to Gudea, but conveyed their

wishes to him by means of a dream. And while the patesi slept a vision

of the night came to him, and he beheld a man whose stature was so great

that it equalled the heavens and the earth. And by the crown he wore

upon his head Gudea knew that the figure must be a god. And by his side

was the divine eagle, the emblem of Shirpurla, and his feet rested upon

the whirlwind, and a lion was crouching upon his right hand and upon his

left. And the figure spoke to the patesi, but he did not understand the

meaning of the words. Then it seemed to Gudea that the sun rose from

the earth and he beheld a woman holding in her hand a pure reed, and she

carried also a tablet on which was a star of the heavens, and she seemed

to take counsel with herself. And while Gudea was gazing he seemed to

see a second man who was like a warrior; and he carried a slab of lapis

lazuli and on it he drew out the plan of a temple. And before the patesi

himself it seemed that a fair cushion was placed, and upon the cushion

was set a mould, and within the mould was a brick, the brick of destiny.

And on the right hand the patesi beheld an ass which lay upon the

ground.

Such was the dream which Gudea beheld in a vision of the night, and he

was troubled because he could not interpret it. So he decided to go

to the goddess Ninâ, who could divine all mysteries of the gods, and

beseech her to tell him the meaning of the vision. But before applying

to the goddess for her help, he thought it best to secure the mediation

of the god Ningirsu and the goddess Gatumdug, in order that they should

use their influence with Ninâ to induce her to reveal the interpretation

of the dream. So the patesi set out to the temple of Ningirsu, and,

having offered a sacrifice and poured out fresh water, he prayed to the

god that his sister, Ninâ, the child of Eridu, might be prevailed upon

to give him help. And the god hearkened to his prayer. Then Gudea made

offerings, and before the sleeping-chamber of the goddess Gatumdug he

offered a sacrifice and poured out fresh water. And he prayed to the

goddess, calling her his queen and the child of the pure heaven, who

gave life to the countries and befriended and preserved the people or

the man on whom she looked with favour.

“I have no mother,” cried Gudea, “but thou art my mother! I have no

father, but thou art a father to me!” And the goddess Gatumdug gave

ear to the patesi’s prayer. Thus encouraged by her favour and that of

Ningirsu, Gudea set out for the temple of the goddess Ninâ.

On his arrival at the temple, the patesi offered a sacrifice and poured

out fresh water, as he had already done when approaching the presence of

Ningirsu and Gatumdug. And he prayed to Ninâ, as the goddess who divines

the secrets of the gods, beseeching her to interpret the vision that had

been sent to him; and he then recounted to her the details of his dream.

When the patesi had finished his story, the goddess addressed him and

told him that she would explain the meaning of his dream to him. And

this was the interpretation of the dream. The man whose stature was so

great that it equalled the heavens and the earth, whose head was that

of a god, at whose side was the divine eagle, whose feet rested on the

whirlwind, while a lion couched on his right hand and on his left, was

her brother, the god Ningirsu. And the words which he uttered were an

order to the patesi that he should build the temple E-ninnû. And the sun

which rose from the earth before the patesi was the god Ningishzida,

for like the sun he goes forth from the earth. And the maiden who held

a pure reed in her hand, and carried the tablet with the star, was her

sister, the goddess Nidaba: the star was the pure star of the temple’s

construction, which she proclaimed. And the second man, who was like a

warrior and carried the slab of lapis lazuli, was the god Nindub, and the

plan of the temple which he drew was the plan of E-ninnû. And the brick

which rested in its mould upon the cushion was the sacred brick of

E-ninnû. And as for the ass which lay upon the ground, that, the goddess

said, was the patesi himself.

Having interpreted the meaning of the dream, the goddess Ninâ proceeded

to give Gudea instruction as to how he should go to work to build the

temple. She told him first of all to go to his treasure-house and bring

forth his treasures from their sealed cases, and out of these to make

certain offerings which he was to place near the god Ningirsu, in the

temple in which he was dwelling at that time. The offerings were to

consist of a chariot, adorned with pure metal and precious stones;

bright arrows in a quiver; the weapon of the god, his sacred emblem, on

which Gudea was to inscribe his own name; and finally a lyre, the music

of which was wont to soothe the god when he took counsel with himself.

Ninâ added that if the patesi carried out her instructions and made the

offerings she had specified, Ningirsu would reveal to him the plan on

which the temple was to be built, and would also bless him. Gudea bowed

himself down in token of his submission to the commands of the goddess,

and proceeded to execute them forthwith. He brought out his treasures,

and from the precious woods and metals which he possessed his craftsmen

fashioned the objects he was to present, and he set them in Ningirsu’s

temple near to the god. He worked day and night, and, having prepared a

suitable spot in the precincts of the temple at the place of judgment,

he spread out upon it as offerings a fat sheep and a kid and the skin of

a young female kid. Then he built a fire of cypress and cedar and other

aromatic woods, to make a sweet savour, and, entering the inner chamber

of the temple, he offered a prayer to Ningirsu. He said that he wished

to build the temple, but he had received no sign that this was the will

of the god, and he prayed for a sign.

While he prayed the patesi was stretched out upon the ground, and the

god, standing near his head, then answered him. He said that he who

should build his temple was none other than Gudea, and that he would

give him the sign for which he asked. But first he described the plan

on which the temple was to be built, naming its various shrines and

chambers and describing the manner in which they were to be fashioned

and adorned. And the god promised that when Gudea should build the

temple, the land would once more enjoy abundance, for Ningirsu would

send a wind which should proclaim to the heavens the return of the

waters. And on that day the waters would fall from the heavens, the

water in the ditches and canals would rise, and water would gush out

from the dry clefts in the ground. And the great fields would once

more produce their crops, and oil would be poured out plenteously in

Sumer[sp.] and wool would again be weighed in great abundance. In that

day the god would go to the mountain where dwelt the whirlwind, and he

would himself direct the wind which should give the land the breath of

life. Gudea must therefore work day and night at the task of building

the temple. One company of men was to relieve another at its toil, and

during the night the men were to kindle lights so that the plain should

be as bright as day. Thus the builders would build continuously. Men

were also to be sent to the mountains to cut down cedars and pines and

other trees and bring their trunks to the city, while masons were to go

to the mountains and were to cut and transport huge blocks of stone to

be used in the construction of the temple. Finally the god gave Gudea

the sign for which he asked. The sign was that he should feel his side

touched as by a flame, and thereby he should know that he was the man

chosen by Ningirsu to carry out his commands.

Gudea bowed his head in submission, and his first act was to consult the

omens, and the omens were favourable. He then proceeded to purify the

city by special rites, so that the mother when angered did not chide her

son, and the master did not strike his servant’s head, and the mistress,

though provoked by her handmaid, did not smite her face. And Gudea drove

all the evil wizards and sorcerers from the city, and he purified and

sanctified the city completely. Then he kindled a great fire of cedar

and other aromatic woods, to make a sweet savour for the gods, and

prayers were offered day and night; and the patesi addressed a prayer

to the Anun-naki, or Spirits of the Earth, who dwelt in Shirpurla,

and assigned a place to them in the temple. Then, having completed

his purification of the city itself, he consecrated its immediate

surroundings. Thus he consecrated the district of Gu-edin, whence the

revenues of Ningirsu were derived, and the lands of the goddess Ninâ

with their populous villages. And he consecrated the wild and savage

bulls which no man could turn aside, and the cedars which were sacred

to Ningirsu, and the cattle of the plains. And he consecrated the armed

men, and the famous warriors, and the warriors of the Sun-god. And the

emblems of the god Ningirsu, and of the two great goddesses, Ninâ and

Ninni, he installed before them in their shrines.

Then Gudea sent far and wide to fetch materials for the construction of

the temple. And the Elamite came from Elani, and men of Susa came from

Susa, and men brought wood from the mountains of Sinai and Melukh-kha.

And into the mountain of cedars, where no man before had penetrated,

the patesi cut a road, and he brought cedars and beams of other precious

woods in great quantities to the city. And he also made a road into the

mountain where stone was quarried, into places where no man before had

penetrated. And he carried great blocks of stone down from the mountain

and loaded them into barges and brought them to the city. And the barges

brought bitumen and plaster, and they were loaded as though they were

carrying grain, and all manner of great things were brought to the

city. Copper ore was brought from the mountain of copper in the land of

Kimash, and gold was brought in powder from the mountains, and silver

was brought from the mountains and porphyry from the land of Melukhkha,

and marble from the mountain of marble. And the patesi installed

goldsmiths and silversmiths, who wrought in these precious metals, for

the adornment of the temple; and he brought smiths who worked in copper

and lead, who were priests of Nin-tu-kalama. In his search for fitting

materials for the building of the temple, Gudea journeyed from the lower

country to the upper country, and from the upper country to the lower

country he returned.

The only other materials now wanting for the construction of the temple

were the sun-dried bricks of clay, of which the temple platform and

the structure of the temple itself were in the main composed. Their

manufacture was now inaugurated by a symbolical ceremony carried out by

the patesi in person. At dawn he performed an ablution with the fitting

rites that accompanied it, and when the day was more advanced he slew

a bull and a kid as sacrifices, and he then entered the temple of

Ningirsu, where he prostrated himself. And he took the sacred mould

and the fair cushion on which it rested in the temple, and he poured a

libation into the mould. Afterwards, having made offerings of honey and

butter, and having burnt incense, he placed the cushion and the mould

upon his head and carried it to the appointed place. There he placed

clay in the mould, shaping it into a brick, and he left the brick in its

mould within the temple. And last of all he sprinkled oil of cedar-wood

around.

The next day at dawn Gudea broke the mould and set the brick in the sun.

And the Sun-god was rejoiced at the brick that he had fashioned. And

Gudea took the brick and raised it on high towards the heavens, and he

carried the brick to his people. In this way the patesi inaugurated the

manufacture of the sun-dried bricks for the temple, the sacred brick

which he had made being the symbol and pattern of the innumerable bricks

to be used in its construction. He then marked out the plan of the

temple, and the text states that he devoted himself to the building of

the temple like a young man who has begun building a house and allows

no pleasure to interfere with his task. And he chose out skilled workmen

and employed them on the building, and he was filled with joy. The gods,

too, are stated to have helped with the building, for Enki fixed the

temennu of the temple, and the goddess Ninâ looked after its oracles,

and Gatumdug, the mother of Shir-purla, fashioned bricks for it morning

and evening, while the goddess Bau sprinkled aromatic oil of cedar-wood.

Gudea himself laid its foundations, and as he did so he blessed the

temple seven times, comparing it to the sacred brick, to the holy

libation-vase, to the divine eagle of Shirpurla, to a terrible couching

panther, to the beautiful heavens, to the day of offerings, and to the

morning light which brightens the land. He caused the temple to rise

towards heaven like a mountain, or like a cedar growing in the desert.

He built it of bricks of Sumer, and the timbers which he set in place

were as strong as the dragon of the deep.

While he was engaged on the building Gudea took counsel of the god Enki,

and he built a fountain for the gods, where they might drink. With the

great stones which he had brought and fashioned he built a reservoir

and a basin for the temple. And seven of the great stones he set up as

stelæ, and he gave them favourable names. The text then recounts

the various parts and shrines of the temple, and it describes their

splendours in similes drawn from the heavens and the earth and the

abyss, or deep, beneath the earth. The temple itself is described as,

being like the crescent of the new moon, or like the sun in the midst

of the stars, or like a mountain of lapis lazuli, or like a mountain of

shining marble. Parts of it are said to have been terrible and strong as

a savage bull, or a lion, or the antelope of the abyss, or the monster

Lakhamu who dwells in the abyss, or the sacred leopard that inspires

terror. One of the doors of the temple was guarded by a figure of the

hero who slew the monster with six heads, and at another door was a good

dragon, and at another a lion; opposite the city were set figures of

the seven heroes, and facing the rising sun was fixed the emblem of the

Sun-god. Figures of other heroes and favourable monsters were set up as

guardians of other portions of the temple. The fastenings of the main

entrance were decorated with dragons shooting out their tongues, and the

bolt of the great door was fashioned like a raging hound.

After this description of the construction and adornment of the

temple the text goes on to narrate how Gudea arranged for its material

endowment. He stalled oxen and sheep, for sacrifice and feasting, in the

outhouses and pens within the temple precincts, and he heaped up grain

in its granaries. Its storehouses he filled with spices so that

they were like the Tigris when its waters are in flood, and in its

treasure-chambers he piled up precious stones, and silver, and lead in

abundance. Within the temple precincts he planted a sacred garden which

was like a mountain covered with vines; and on the terrace he built

a great reservoir, or tank, lined with lead, in addition to the great

stone reservoir within the temple itself. He constructed a special

dwelling-place for the sacred doves, and among the flowers of the temple

garden and under the shade of the great trees the birds of heaven flew

about unmolested.

The first of the two great cylinders of Gudea ends at this point in the

description of the temple, and it is evident that its text was composed

while the work of building was still in progress. Moreover, the writing

of the cylinder was finished before the actual work of building the

temple was completed, for the last column of the text concludes with a

prayer to Ningirsu to make it glorious during the progress of the work,

the prayer ending with the words, “O Ningirsu, glorify it! Glorify the

temple of Ningirsu during its construction!” The text of the second of

the two great cylinders is shorter than that of the first, consisting

of twenty-four instead of thirty columns of writing, and it was composed

and written after the temple was completed. Like the first of the

cylinders, it concludes with a prayer to Ningirsu on behalf of the

temple, ending with the similar refrain, “O Ningirsu, glorify it!

Glorify the temple of Ningirsu after its construction!” The first

cylinder, as we have seen, records how it came about that Gudea decided

to rebuild the temple E-ninnû in honour of Ningirsu. It describes how,

when the land was suffering from drought and famine, Gudea had a dream,

how Ninâ interpreted the dream to mean that he must rebuild the temple,

and how Ningirsu himself promised that this act of piety would restore

abundance and prosperity to the land. Its text ends with the long

description of the sumptuous manner in which the patesi carried out the

work, the most striking points of which we have just summarized. The

narrative of the second cylinder begins at the moment when the building

of the temple was finished, and when all was ready for the great god

Nin-girsu to be installed therein, and its text is taken up with a

description of the ceremonies and rites with which this solemn function

was carried out. It presents us with a picture, drawn from life, of the

worship and cult of the ancient Sumerians in actual operation. In view

of its importance from the point of view of the study and comparison of

the Sumerian and Babylonian religious systems, its contents also may be

summarized. We will afterwards discuss briefly the information furnished

by both the cylinders on the Sumerian origin of many of the religious

beliefs and practices which were current among the later Semitic

inhabitants of Babylonia and Assyria.

When Gudea had finished building the new temple of E-ninnû, and had

completed the decoration and adornment of its shrines, and had planted

its gardens and stocked its treasure-chambers and storehouses, he

applied himself to the preliminary ceremonies and religious preparations

which necessarily preceded the actual function of transferring the

statue of the god Ningirsu from his old temple to his new one. Gudea’s

first act was to install the Anunnaki, or Spirits of the Earth, in the

new temple, and when he had done this, and had supplied additional

sheep for their sacrifices and food in abundance for their offerings, he

prayed to them to give him their assistance and to pronounce a prayer at

his side when he should lead Ningirsu into his new dwelling-place.

The text then describes how Gudea went to the old temple of Ningirsu,

accompanied by his protecting spirits who walked before him and behind

him. Into the old temple he carried sumptuous offerings, and when he

had set them before the god, he addressed him in prayer and said: “O

my King, Ningirsu! O Lord, who curbest the raging waters! O Lord, whose

word surpasseth all others! O Son of Enlil, O warrior, what commands

shall I faithfully carry out? O Ningirsu, I have built thy temple, and

with joy would I lead thee therein, and my goddess Bau would install at

thy side.” We are told that the god accepted Gudea’s prayer, and thereby

he gave his consent to be removed from the old temple of E-ninnû to his

new one which bore the same name.

But the ceremony of the god’s removal was not carried out at once, for

the due time had not arrived. The year ended, and the new year came,

and then “the month of the temple” began. The third day of the month

was that appointed for the installation of Ningirsu. Gudea meanwhile had

sprinkled the ground with oil, and set out offerings of honey and butter

and wine, and grain mixed with milk, and dates, and food untouched

by fire, to serve as food for the gods; and the gods themselves had

assisted in the preparations for the reception of Ningirsu. The god

Asaru made ready the temple itself, and Ninmada performed the ceremony

of purification. The god Enki issued oracles, and the god Nindub, the

supreme priest of Eridu, brought incense. Ninâ performed chants within

the temple, and brought black sheep and holy cows to its folds and

stalls. This record of the help given by the other gods we may interpret

as meaning that the priests attached to the other great Sumerian

temples took part in the preparation of the new temple, and added their

offerings to the temple stores. To many of the gods, also, special

shrines within the temple were assigned.

When the purification of E-ninnû was completed and the way between

the old temple and the new made ready, all the inhabitants of the city

prostrated themselves on the ground. “The city,” says Gudea, “was like

the mother of a sick man who prepareth a potion for him, or like the

cattle of the plain which lie down together, or like the fierce lion,

the master of the plain, when he coucheth.” During the day and the night

before the ceremony of removal, prayers and supplications were uttered,

and at the first light of dawn on the appointed day the god Ningirsu

went into his new temple “like a whirlwind,” the goddess Bau entering

at his side “like the sun rising over Shirpurla.” She entered beside his

couch, like a faithful wife, whose cares are for her own household, and

she dwelt beside his ear and bestowed abundance upon Shirpurla.

As the day began to brighten and the sun rose, Gudea set out as

offerings in the temple a fat ox and a fat sheep, and he brought a vase

of lead and filled it with wine, which he poured out as a libation, and

he performed incantations. Then, having duly established Ningirsu and

Bau in the chief shrine, he turned his attention to the lesser gods and

installed them in their appointed places in the temple, where they would

be always ready to assist Ningirsu in the temple ceremonies and in the

issue of his decrees for the welfare of the city and its inhabitants.

Thus he established the god Galalim, the son of Ningirsu, in a chosen

spot in the great court in front of the temple, where, under the orders

of his father, he should direct the just and curb the evil-doer; he

would also by his presence strengthen and preserve the temple, while

his special duty was to guard the throne of destiny and, on behalf of

Ningirsu, to place the sceptre in the hands of the reigning patesi.

Near to Ningirsu and under his orders Gudea also established the god

Dunshaga, whose function it was to sanctify the temple and to look after

its libations and offerings, and to see to the due performance of the

ceremonies of ablution. This god would offer water to Ningirsu with a

pure hand, he would pour out libations of wine and strong drink, and

would tend the oxen, sheep, kids, and other offerings which were brought

to the temple night and day. To the god Lugalkurdub, who was also

installed in the temple, was assigned the privilege of holding in his

hand the mace with the seven heads, and it was his duty to open the door

of the Gate of Combat. He guarded the sacred weapons of Ningirsu and

destroyed the countries of his enemies. He was Ningirsu’s chief leader

in battle, and another god with lesser powers was associated with him as

his second leader.

Ningirsu’s counsellor was the god Lugalsisa, and he also had his

appointed place in E-ninnû. It was his duty to receive the prayers

of Shirpurla and render them propitious; he superintended and blessed

Ningirsu’s journey when he visited Eridu or returned from that city,

and he made special intercessions for the life of Gudea. The minister of

Ningirsu’s harîm was the god Shakanshabar, and he was installed near to

Nin-girsu that he might issue his commands, both great and small. The

keeper of the harîm was the god Urizu, and it was his duty to purify the

water and sanctify the grain, and he tended Ningirsu’s sleeping-chamber

and saw that all was arranged therein as was fitting. The driver of

Ningirsu’s chariot was the god Ensignun; it was his duty to keep the

sacred chariot as bright as the stars of heaven, and morning and evening

to tend and feed Ningirsu’s sacred ass, called Ug-kash, and the ass

of Eridu. The shepherd of Ningirsu’s kids was the god Enlulim, and he

tended the sacred she-goat who suckled the kids, and he guarded her so

that the serpent should not steal her milk. This god also looked

after the oil and the strong drink of E-ninnû, and saw that its store

increased.

Ningirsu’s beloved musician was the god Ushum-gabkalama, and he was

installed in E-ninnû that he might take his flute and fill the temple

court with joy. It was his privilege to play to Ningirsu as he listened

in his harîm, and to render the life of the god pleasant in E-ninnû.

Ningirsu’s singer was the god Lugaligi-khusham, and he had his appointed

place in E-ninnû, for he could appease the heart and soften anger; he

could stop the tears which flowed from weeping eyes, and could lessen

sorrow in the sighing heart. Gudea also installed in E-ninnû the seven

twin-daughters of the goddess Bau, all virgins, whom Ningirsu had

begotten. Their names were Zarzaru, Impaë, Urenuntaëa, Khegir-nuna,

Kheshaga, Gurmu, and Zarmu. Gudea installed them near their father that

they might offer favourable prayers.

The cultivator of the district of Gu-edin was the god Gishbare, and he

was installed in the temple that he might cause the great fields to be

fertile, and might make the wheat glisten in Gu-edin, the plain assigned

to Ningirsu for his revenues. It was this god’s duty also to tend the

machines for irrigation, and to raise the water into the canals and

ditches of Shirpurla, and thus to keep the city’s granaries well filled.

The god Kal was the guardian of the fishing in Gu-edin, and his chief

duty was to place fish in the sacred pools. The steward of Gu-edin was

the god Dimgalabzu, whose duty it was to keep the plain in good order,

so that the birds might abound there and the beasts might raise their

young in peace; he also guarded the special privilege, which the plain

enjoyed, of freedom from any tax levied upon the increase of the

cattle pastured there. Last of all Gudea installed in E-ninnû the god

Lugalenurua-zagakam, who looked after the construction of houses in the

city and the building of fortresses upon the city wall; in the temple it

was his privilege to raise on high a battle-axe made of cedar.

All these lesser deities, having close relations to the god Ningirsu,

were installed by Gudea in his temple in close proximity to him, that

they might be always ready to perform their special functions. But the

greater deities also had their share in the inauguration of the temple,

and of these Gudea specially mentions Ana, Enlil, Ninkharsag, Enki, and

Enzu, who all assisted in rendering the temple’s lot propitious. For at

least three of the greater gods (Ana, Enlil, and the goddess Nin-makh)

Gudea erected shrines near one another and probably within the temple’s

precincts, and, as the passage which records this fact is broken, it is

possible that the missing portion of the text recorded the building of

shrines to other deities. In any case, it is clear that the composer

of the text represents all the great gods as beholding the erection and

inauguration of Ningirsu’s new temple with favour.

After the account of the installation of Ningirsu, and his spouse Bau,

and his attendant deities, the text records the sumptuous offerings

which Gudea placed within Ningirsu’s shrine. These included another

chariot drawn by an ass, a seven-headed battle-axe, a sword with nine

emblems, a bow with terrible arrows and a quiver decorated with wild

beasts and dragons shooting out their tongues, and a bed which was

set within the god’s sleeping-chamber. On the couch in the shrine the

goddess Bau reclined beside her lord Ningirsu, and ate of the great

victims which were sacrificed in their honour.

When the ceremony of installation had been successfully performed, Gudea

rested, and for seven days he feasted with his people. During this time

the maid was the equal of her mistress, and master and servant consorted

together as friends. The powerful and the humble man lay down side by

side, and in place of evil speech only propitious words were heard. The

rich man did not wrong the orphan and the strong man did not oppress the

widow. The laws of Ninâ and Ningirsu were observed, justice was bright

in the sunlight, and the Sun-god trampled iniquity under foot. The

building of the temple also restored material prosperity to the land,

for the canals became full of water and fish swarmed in the pools, the

granaries were filled with grain and the flocks and herds brought forth

their increase. The city of Shirpurla was satiated with abundance.

Such is a summary of the account which Gudea has left us of his

rebuilding of the temple E-ninnû, of the reasons which led him to

undertake the work, and of the results which followed its completion. It

has often been said that the inscriptions of the ancient Sumerians are

without much intrinsic value, that they mainly consist of dull votive

formulæ, and that for general interest the best of them cannot be

compared with the later inscriptions of the Semitic inhabitants

of Mesopotamia. This reproach, for which until recently there was

considerable justification, has been finally removed by the working

out of the texts upon Gudea’s cylinders. For picturesque narrative, for

wealth of detail, and for striking similes, it would be hard to find

their superior in Babylonian and Assyrian literature. They are, in fact,

very remarkable compositions, and in themselves justify the claim that

the Sumerians were possessed of a literature in the proper sense of the

term.

But that is not their only value, for they give a vivid picture of

ancient Sumerian life and of the ideals and aims which actuated the

people and their rulers. The Sumerians were essentially an unmilitary

race. That they could maintain a stubborn fight for their territory is

proved by the prolonged struggle maintained by Shirpurla against her

rival Gishkhu, but neither ruler nor people was inflamed by love of

conquest for its own sake. They were settled in a rich and fertile

country, which supplied their own wants in abundance, and they were

content to lead a peaceful life therein, engaged in agricultural and

industrial pursuits, and devoted wholly to the worship of their gods.

Gudea’s inscriptions enable us to realize with what fervour they carried

out the rebuilding of a temple, and how the whole resources of the

nation were devoted to the successful completion of the work. It is true

that the rebuilding of E-ninnû was undertaken in a critical period when

the land was threatened with famine, and the peculiar magnificence with

which the work was carried out may be partly explained as due to the

belief that such devotion would ensure a return of material prosperity.

But the existence of such a belief is in itself an index to the people’s

character, and we may take it that the record faithfully represents the

relations of the Sumerians to their gods, and the important place which

worship and ritual occupied in the national life.

Moreover, the inscriptions of Gudea furnish much valuable information

with regard to the details of Sumerian worship and the elaborate

organization of the temples. From them we can reconstruct a picture of

one of these immense buildings, with its numerous shrines and courts,

surrounded by sacred gardens and raising its ziggurat, or temple tower,

high above the surrounding city. Within its dark chambers were the

mysterious figures of the gods, and what little light could enter would

have been reflected in the tanks of sacred water sunk to the level of

the pavement. The air within the shrines must have been heavy with the

smell of incense and of aromatic woods, while the deep silence would

have been broken only by the chanting of the priests and the feet of

those that bore offerings. Outside in the sunlight cedars and other rare

trees cast a pleasant shade, and birds flew about among the flowers and

bushes in the outer courts and on the garden terraces. The area covered

by the temple buildings must have been enormous, for they included the

dwellings of the priests, stables and pens for the cattle, sheep, and

kids employed for sacrifice, and treasure-chambers and storehouses and

granaries for the produce from the temple lands.

We also get much information with regard to the nature of the offerings

and the character of the ceremonies which were performed. We may mention

as of peculiar interest Gudea’s symbolical rite which preceded the

making of the sun-dried bricks, and the ceremony of the installation of

Ningirsu in the presence of the prostrate city. The texts also throw

an interesting light on the truly Oriental manner in which, when

approaching one deity for help, the cooperation and assistance of other

deities were first secured. Thus Gudea solicited the intercession of

Ningirsu and Gatumdug before applying to the goddess Ninâ to interpret

his dream. The extremely human character of the gods themselves is also

well illustrated. Thus we gather from the texts that Ningirsu’s temple

was arranged like the palace of a Sumerian ruler and that he was

surrounded by gods who took the place of the attendants and ministers

of his human counterpart. His son was installed in a place of honour and

shared with him the responsibility of government. Another god was his

personal attendant and cupbearer, who offered him fair water and looked

after the ablutions. Two more were his generals, who secured his country

against the attacks of foes. Another was his counsellor, who received

and presented petitions from his subjects and superintended his

journeys. Another was the head of his harîm, a position of great

trust and responsibility, while a keeper of the harîm looked after the

practical details. Another god was the driver of his chariot, and it

is interesting to note that the chariot was drawn by an ass, for horses

were not introduced into Western Asia until a much later period. Other

gods performed the functions of head shepherd, chief musician, chief

singer, head cultivator and inspector of irrigation, inspector of the

fishing, land steward, and architect. His household also included his

wife and his seven virgin daughters. In addition to the account of the

various functions performed by these lesser deities, the texts also

furnish valuable facts with regard to the characters and attributes

of the greater gods and goddesses, such as the attributes of Ningirsu

himself, and the character of Ninâ as the goddess who divined and

interpreted the secrets of the gods.

But perhaps the most interesting conclusions to be drawn from the texts

relate to the influence exerted by the ancient Sumerians upon Semitic

beliefs and practices. It has, of course, long been recognized that the

later Semitic inhabitants of Babylonia and Assyria drew most of their

culture from the Sumerians, whom they displaced and absorbed. Their

system of writing, the general structure of their temples, the ritual of

their worship, the majority of their religious compositions, and many of

their gods themselves are to be traced to a Sumerian origin, and much of

the information obtained from the cylinders of Gudea merely confirms

or illustrates the conclusions already deduced from other sources. As

instances we may mention the belief in spirits, which is illustrated by

the importance attached to the placating of the Anunnaki, or Spirits of

the Earth, to whom a special place and special offerings were assigned

in E-ninnû. The Sumerian origin of ceremonies of purification is

confirmed by Gudea’s purification of the city before beginning the

building of the temple, and again before the transference of the god

from his old temple to the new one. The consultation of omens, which was

so marked a feature of Babylonian and Assyrian life, is seen in actual

operation under the Sumerians; for, even after Gudea had received direct

instructions from Ningirsu to begin building his temple, he did not

proceed to carry them out until he had consulted the omens and found

that they were favourable. Moreover, the references to mythological

beings, such as the seven heroes, the dragon of the deep, and the god

who slew the dragon, confirm the opinion that the creation legends and

other mythological compositions of the Babylonians were derived by them

from Sumerian sources. But there are two incidents in the narrative

which are on a rather different plane and are more startling in their

novelty. One is the story of Gudea’s dream, and the other the sign

which he sought from his god. The former is distinctly apocalyptic in

character, and both may be parallelled in what is regarded as purely

Semitic literature. That such conceptions existed among the Sumerians is

a most interesting fact, and although the theory of independent origin

is possible, their existence may well have influenced later Semitic

beliefs.