You are on page 1of 184

Old

^^x^^ Insc^^

Chiefly from Nippur
H. V.

HILPRECHT

presentcJ) to

tTbe Xibrarp
of tbe

"inniversit^ of

Toronto

(3f^

The Department of Oriental Languages Of uoo in tho Jy
»

''rlr n t n l

n rm lini L

<4---

.

.

.

Vol.^uojl PHILAUELPOIA fleprint from the Transactions of the Amer. No. N. Pkinters Anson Partridge. Society. I Plates 51-100 56i^. Philos. S. 3 D. MacCalla & Company Incorpobatj:d. XVIII.THE BABYLONIAN EXPEDITION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SERIES A: CUNEIFORM TEXTS EDITED BY VOLUME Part II. Printer and Lithoobapheu 1896 ..

.

D.D. V. Professor of Assyrian Ph.. and Curator of the and Comparatite Semitic Philology Babylonian Museum in the University of Pennsylvania PHIIvADEIvPHIA. HILPKECHT.D.OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR / \ PART II Plates 36-70 and XVI-XXX By H. 189Q / .

.

Babylonian Section of the Department of Archmology and Palaeontology CLARENCE Chairman of the Publication CLARK Committee and Treasurer of the Department of Avchaology and Paleontology AND TO ALL OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BABYLONIAN EXPLORATION FUND TO WHOSE LIBERALITT.. and Palmontology Provost of the University of Pennsylvania WILLIAM PEPPER.M. ENERGY AND HEARTY INTEREST IN THE PROGRESS OF SCIENCE ARE CHIEFLY DUE THE GREAT RESULTS ACHIEVED AT NUFFAR . A. HARRISON". M. CLARK H. LL.D.TO CHARLES C. President of the Department of Archmology EDWARD Chairman of the W.D.

.

and has continued to the pres- ent day. " details cf. 13-46. Playnes' veeekly reports to the Committee in Philadelphia) Sections I. p. to his government in Washington. 45-63. announced in the Preface to the first part of the present work. and. The members expedition left America in the summei-. PREFACE. 1888. The publication of the history of the American Expedition to Nnffar. Recent Research in BOile Lands. . To the list there given may be added Some Eecent Results of the University of Pennsylvania Excavations at Nippur. III-VI. 386-391 . PART II.Old Babylonian Inscriptions Chiefly from Nippur. especially the official report on the results of the excavations sent by Hon. 353-368 (with copious extracts from Mr. with but short intervals required for the welfare and temporary rest of the in the field and for replenishing the exhausted stores of the camp. the constant sacrifice of health and comfort. Bezold. the United States Minister in Constantinople. it seems now- necessary to summarize the principal results' and submit them to a wider circle of students." in The American Journal of Archaeology X. pp. A. "Aus Briefen an C. 1894. and the large pecuniary outlay. pp. Terrell. Assyriaca. ' Gf. pp. in the opinion of the undersigned have fully repaid the great amount of time and unselfish devotion. which up to date has reached the sum of $70. results obtained have been extraordinary. .000. has been delayed by unforeseen circumstances." in Part I. A brief sketch of the history and chief results of the " American Excavations in Nuffar " will be found in Hilprecht. 'For Peters." in Zeitschrift fur Assy riologieYIlI. The editor. W. 45. the "Bibliography of the Expedition. In view of the increased interest ^ in these excavations. summer. Three periods can be distinguished in the history of the exca- vations. Hilprecht.

side of the ziggurrat and shrine of Bur-Sin II excavated. Director. 1 enameled clay coffin and first many other antiquities similar in character to those in greater excavated during the • campaign but number. I^oorian. a few vase fragments of Lugalzaggisi 2 door-sockets lios. CommisD. H. seals and seal cylinders. . their ancient moulds . and metal jewelry in gold. Second Camptaign. Peters. etc. 1889. various sizes and shapes terra-cotta images of gods . of New York. reliefs. I and X. refer to the corresponding sections of the ruins. April 15. . Haynes. by and trial trenches. Objects carried away : Over 2000 cuneiform fragments (among them three dated in the reign of King Ashuretililani of Assyria). 1890. as indicated on the plan published in Part I. fragment of a 6).. and Su- Business Manager. figurines and toys in terra-cotta weapons and utensils in stone . Noorian. — Staff: J. several barrel cylinder of Sargon of Assyria. G. and an Ottoman Commissioner. OLD BABYIiONTAN INSCRIPTIOKS V. in diorite of Bur-Sin II over 100 inscribed votive axes. . 1888-18S9. . inscribed stone tablet (PI. Interpreter perintendent of Workmen. Business Manager. 'These numbers PI. F. terra-cotta brick stamp of Naram-Sin. Commissary and Photographer D. H. door-socket of Kurigalzu. 1889-1890. 3 brick stamps in terra-cotta and three door-sockets in diorite of Sargon 1 brick stamp of Naram-Sin . Hilprecht and R.—Staff: John P. Ob- Row of rooms on the S. whence he returned to America. with a rical maximum force of 200 Arabs. jects carried in the reigns away : About 8000 cuneiform tablets and fragments (most of them dated of Cassite kings and of rulers of the second dynasty of Ur).- Many clay coffins tablets examined and photographed.. Haynes. . was the eighth member of the expedition. XV. P. Principal results : Trigonometfield survey of the ruins and their surroundings. 61 inscribed vase fragments of Alusharshid . Assyriologists J. H. Director . 25 Hebrew bowls. fragments of inscribed vases (among them two of King Lugalzaggisi and of Erech). intag. Excavations from January : 14 to May 3. . examination of the whole systematic excavations chiefly at III. a number of inscribed bricks. E. . Prince. 2 vase fragments of Entemena of Shii-purla several vase fragments of 1 inscribed unhewn marble block and Lugalkigubnidudu . a number of . J. knobs. 8 First Campaign. new inscribed bricks I . . Principal results Examina- tion of ruins by trial trenches and systematic excavations at III. etc. Architect Bey. Field. Interpreter Bedry sary and Photographer P. II.^ Excavations from February 6 to Peters. 75 Hebrew and other inscribed bowls . copper. c. Commissioner of the Ottoman Government. D. V and X continued. with a maximum force of 400 Arabs. V. but during the march across the Syrian desert he fell so seriously sick that he had to be left behind at Bagdad. bronze and various precious stones a number of weights. silver. Harper. . a large number of stone and terra-cotta vases of . presented to the temple by Cassite kings c.

) and fragments of other statues of the same period. the later additions to the ziggurrat studied. incised votive tablet of Ur-Eiilil. building inscriptions. The . Examination of the lowest strata . and critical searching for the original bed and banks of the Shatt-en-N"il. 1 of Naram-Sin. 1 votive tablet of Dungi . terruption of Excavations from April 11. 15 brick stamps of Sargon I. 1894). Lugalc. can disclose the manifold character of these documents —syllabaries. 3000 B. 3 of 60 in- Entemena. photographed and. votive tablets. with an average force of 50-60 I. April 4 June 4. inventories. with a view to a complete and connected conception of the whole. 1893-1 89G. Arabs. whenever necessary. inscribed lapis lazuli discs of Cassite fragment of a barrel cylinder of the Assyrian period in fragments of an Old Babylonian terra-cotta fountain tiles.— Staff: J. plans of estates. ISDi. 9 Tllircl Campaign.. Principal results: Systematic excavations at III. the first Dungi in Nii)pur. . the two most ancient arches of Babylonia discovered vases unearthed tents saved. etc. tax lists. 1 door-socket and 1 votive tablet of Ur-Gur kings . to February 15. 1 of Sargon. . Architect and Dranghtsman. kigub-nidudu and over 500 vase fragments of pre-Sargonic kings and patesis scribed vase fragments of Alusharshid. YI-X. contracts. With regard to the wealth of Philadelphia expedition takes equal rank with the best sent out from England or France. statue in diorite (| of life size. 1893.000 cuneiform tablets and fragments (among them contracts dated . II. selected cuneiform texts. The systematic and is careful in manner of laying bare the vast ruins of the temple of Bel and other buildings Nuffar. Director. 50 clay and burial urns. astronomical and religious texts.C. historical fi-agments. a number of relief. equal to that of Layard and Victor Place in Assyria and something without parallel in previous expeditions to Babylonia. c. high water cocks. H. chronological lists. removed the preserved portions of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat uncovered on all four sides . Only an exhaustive study and which will finally a systematic publication of embrace twelve volumes of two to three letters. and of Darius II and Artaxerxes inscribed brick of inscribed torso of a Mnemon) many bricks of Sargon I and Naram-Sin. structures built by I^aram-Sin and pre-Sargonic buildings and their con- c. etc. . and many other antiquities of a character similar to first those excavated daring the two campaigns but its results this in greater number and variety. 3 unfinished marble blocks of . Joseph A. of the temple. parts each. drain a collection of representative bricka from coffins all the buildings found in Nippur. three sections excavated down to the water level determination of the different layers on the basis of uncovered pavements and platforms ... 1896 (with an to in- two months. c. and an Ottoman Commissioner. 400 tombs of various periods and forms excavated and in the reign of Diingi Objects carried away: About 21. Haynes. from Jnne to ^^Tovember. Meyer. systematic study of the ancient system of Babylonian drainage . CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.

partment of Architecture ' in the p. to establish a sure foundation for palaiographic research. It was. 562). achieved at innumerable sacrifices and under a burden of labors enough for a giant.10 results so far obtained OLD BAIJYIiONIAK INSCIUPTIONS have already proved their great importance all in connection with ancient chronology. The second continued in by the fii'st. situated in the neighborhood of extensive malarial marshes and "amongst the most wild ^ and ignorant Arabs that can be found nearly sacrificed his life in this part of Asia. shade rises to the enormous height of 120° Fahrenheit (= desert rob the tent of its 39° Reaumur). had regarded in the lower regions as practically impossible to excavate continuously of Mesopotamia. isolated fi-om civilized men and most no easy task time without the comfort of a single companion. I am much inclined to question whether extensive excavations car- ried on at Niffer would produce any very important or interesting results " (p. But the crowning success was reserved entitled to for the unselfish devotion and untiring efforts of Haynes. where the temperature c. But I cannot in refer to the work and success of the Babylonian Exploration Fund life Philadelphia without saying in sorrow a word of hira who laid down his in the cause of this expedition. in the full significance of the woid. I." in excavating several weeks without all Haynes has of the for spent almost three years continuously. The work of the first. while yielding many inscribed documents. the line of research majjped out richer harvest in tablets deepened the trenches and gathered a and other inscribed monuments. 565. Meyer. Each of the three expeditions which its make up this gigantic scientific undertaking has contributed own peculiar share to the total results obtained. " On the whole." where Layaid himself success. Joseph A. . Nineveh and Babylon. a graduate student of the DeMassachusetts Institute of Technology. while choleia is lurking at the threshold of the camp and treacherous Arabs fulfill are planning rob- bery and murder ordinary men. the ideal Baby- lonian explorer. ' c. while the ever-present insects bite and sting and buzz through day and night. and the fact that nearly the periods of Babylonian history are represented by inscriptions from the same ruins will enable us. Before he accomplished his memorable task. Mr. ia these publications. a moaumen- ium cere perennius. Layard. where the stifling sand-storms from the shadow and parch the human skin with the heat of a furnace. pp. any \)es- European or American tiferous Affej to dwell thirty-four months near these insect-breeding and in perfect swamps. indeed. in Boston. Layard. was principally tentative and gave us a clear conception of the grandeur of the work to be done. On the very same ruins of Nippur. and who themselves had exhibited unusual courit age and energy. 556-562. — and yet during all these wearisome hours to the duties of three Truly a splendid victory. even such men as were an independent opinion.

Even if the sand-storms of the Babylonian plains should eiface his solitary it? grave. In the European cemetery of Bagdad. . I trust. 1894. By his excellent drawings of trenches. The favorable reception which was accorded to the latter by all specialists of Europe and America has convinced me that the method adopted is the correct one. manifested by the great amount of time and care he devoted to the restoration of my eyesight. Turkey and other Eastern countries of architecture to the best advantage. A. T. The tions it publication cf this second part. he rests. will. In connection witht'ii^ my pleasant duty to express my sincere gratitude to George my valued confrere in the American Philosophical Society. completing the reor- ganization of the Babylonian Section of the Impei'ial Museum left entrusted to me .D. where even before this the Syrian physician of the second campaign and the present writer had absorbed the germs of malignant typhus. IX. for in nearly four months I was deprived of my overtaxed eye. Horn. having fallen a staunch fighter in the cause of science. prepared in connection willi in Rev.* CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. what matters His bones rest in classic soil. now instructor of Old Testament Theology Chicago. that a large portion of the time interest of the by ray duties as professor . for his un- ceasing interest in the preparation of this volume. In May. Tablets Dated in the Reigns of Darius Hand Artaxerxes Mnemon. first. who facilitated the printpupil. Clay. 36-42 required more than ordinary time and labor . and to Secretary Dr. and curator was to be devoted to the work in the field that the first two inscriptions published on Pis. Ilaynes Bagdad and was soon full of enthusiasm and i-eady to accompany him to the ruins of Nuffar. for their restoration from 125 e. To this venerable body as a whole. part of the first I take this opportunity to express my great regret that this second volume could not appear at the falls early date expected. 11 to study the histoi-y in had traveled through India. it for this unavoidable delay.«.. Dr. and to the Transacmembers of its Pubmy lication ' Committee. where the cradle of the race its once stood. George H. But in December of the same year weakened frame fell a victim to the autumnal fevers on the border of the marshes. on the banks of the Tigris.Kceedingly small fragments the use of and that. of which one is in print now ^ . like that of the was made possible by the liberality and support of the American Philosophical Society. M. in whose appears. some degree explain the reasons statement I regard Friebis. buildings and objects he has rendered most his valuable service to this expedition. finally. Vol. that during the same period three more volumes were in the course of preparation. The fact that two consecutive summers and were spent in Constantinople. c. he met Mr. The Old Babylonian cuneiform texts submitted in the following pages have again been copied and prepared by my own hand. and the history of Assyriology will not omit his name from pages. in accordance with the principle set forth in the Preface to Part I.

will My complete transliteration and translation of and of Nos. the cuneiform material of the oldest phase of Babylonian history of a safe and definite discrimination. Hayes Ward of New York for placing the fragment of a barrel cylinder of Marduk-shabik-zerim and the impression of a Babylonian seal cylinder respectively at my disposal. The Inscription original. acknowledge likewise my obligations to Dr. No endeavor has been made to arrange Nos. Sayce would not have di-awn inference (The Academy. 147) and the first document of the time of MardukIn view of the great member of the Pashe dynasty. 25. critical importance which attaches to these monuments." will prove of exceptional value to metrologists.. 120). wliere the Cassite god Shugab (= Nergal. p. the translation of which Contents. Delilzsch. A boundary stone. . a their inscriptions and trustworthy edition of given in the " Table of had become a real necessity. 1. is still too scanty to allow In oi-der to present the monumental texts from Nippur lin as completely as possible. it has suffered nia. return my heartiest thanks and my warm appreciation. Talcott Williams of Philadelphia and to Rev.12 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS I ing of this work in the most cordial mannei'. is The Httle legend. 12) transliterated incorrectly by Shu-tah. Rifat Bey. Pinclies's hasty transliteration Prof. Director of the Royal Museums. Although on palaographic evidence certain periods will be readily recognized in these texts. 189) that the I Hyksos god Sutekh belongs to offer to the language and people of the Cassites. Sept. 7. W. Ward's Seal Cylinders and Other Oriental Seals (Handbook No. 131. 13 of the Metropolitan Museum was of Art in New York). I called Dr. Sayce'a view rests made in connection witli a brief visit to America in 1893 and published in Dr. note.' do not need an apology for in- cluding the large fragment of Naram-Sin's inscription (No. has my warmest thanks. 63. was among the contents of as many different boxes of Nos. which restored from six fragments Ibund tablets. is in Constantinople. 151 and 153 appear in one of the next numbers of Zcitschrifljur Assyriolagie. military physician of a garrison stationed in the neighon Mr. 124 and 126. Prof. For permitting I its reproduction and for provid- ing me with an excellent cast of the original. 86-117 chronologically. Prof A. the fragment of a large boundary stone now in Ber- has found a place in these pages. At the same time I call the attention of Assyriologists to the interesting text published on PI. p. 93. cf. No. The which the proprietor kindly much from its long exposure to the rain and sun of Babylopermitted me to publish. The stone is so import- ant that this text should be purchased by an American or European museum. Kossaer. 391. belong to the collection designated by me as Coll. No. 1895. p. which were copied during the time of the great earthquakes in Constantinople.a (No. Ward's attention to this apparent mistake and gave the correct reading in ' my Assyriaca. Together with several bundled other tablets they were presented to the Imperial Otto- man Museum by ' Rifat Bey. 1894. in the present series. Erraan. the only cuneiform tablet found in Palestine ahe-irba. If the text of the latter had his otherwise very natural been published before. Dr.

basis. 160. P. and in is worthy of all the time and labor Ottoman MuCf. Ililprccht. deciphered by assiduity Hieroglyphics and cuneiform inscriptions were human ingenuity. and his accomplished brother. 13 borhood of Tello. deserve Museum on my heartiest thanks for permitting the publication of these texts. The marble slab recently found near Malatia' has ofieied a welcome opportunity to test the But the great desideratum seems to be more material than is at present at our disposal. Hanidy. For determining indebted to the mineralogical character of the several stones. 25 f. But what European government. Excavations in the mounds of Malatia would doubtless yield it. and finally the brilliant reasoning and stupendous of Jensen in Marburg have forced the '' Hittite " sphinx to surrender her long-guarded secret. together now safely deposited in the Imperial p. analyze the results of Jensen's extraordinary work critically and sine ira must I necessarily arrive at the conclusion as to the general correctness of his system. of the University of Pennsylvania. seum.energetic and intelligent efforts have placed the rapidly growing Ottoman Museum on a new. Smith and A. what private citizens. Brown. The artist took as his motive a hunting scene from the royal sen in the i)aliicts of Nineveh. Ho- XVII. . garth With Hamdy Bey's permission published in Itecueil. 'May The high-towering temple of BlI with two other smaller fragments. Dr. necessary funds ? May the noble example given by a few liberal gentlemen of Phila- delphia find a loud echo in other parts of the world. Ilalil. when the years world will wonder following —just as we wonder now when we glance back upon the great achievement sterile G rot efend's interest —that at the close of the nineteenth century years could elapse before Jensen's discovery and well-founded structure created beautiful any deep and received that general attention which it deserves. E. Drs. and for many other courtesies and personal services rendered during my repeated visits to the East.CHIEFLY FROM IS^IPPUK. never lack that hearty support and enthusiasm which characterized its past history. He who has taken the pains to read and read again and et studio. neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet. I am greatly my colleagues. Recent Research in Bible Lands. Director General. Dr. A critical analysis of the well-preserved text will be given by Jen- next number of Rixucil. The systematic excavations of the last decenniums have revolutionized the study of ancient history and philology. also 23. and were catalogued by the undersigned writer. and they have opened to us long-forgotten centuries and millenniums of an eventful past. 1894. Director of who in many ways have efficiently promoted the work of the American Expedition.C. Tlie inscription cannot be older than 750-700 B. and who by theii. but I see the am day not very far. will furnish the validity of his theory. the Archaeological His Excellency. and may the work which they themselves have begun and carried on successfully and systematically for several years in Nippur. scientific the Bosphorus. p. Profs.

14

OLD BABYLOJflAN INSCKIPTIONS CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.

and money spent
ancient

Though now in rnins, the vast vpalls of this most sanctuary of Shumer and Akkad still testify to the lofty aspirations of a byin its excavation.

gone

race,

and even

in their

dreary desolation they seem to reecho the ancient
:

hymn

once chanted in their shadow
Shad-ii

raVu UuBel Jmharsag

O

great

mountain of

Bel, Imkharsag,

sha reshathu shamami shanna
apiii ellim

whose summit

rivals the heavens, laid in the briglit

nhurshudu ushsJiwhu

whose foundations are

abysmal

sea,

tna matati kima rimi ekdu

rabm
sihuti.
2,

resting in the lands as a mighty steer,

karn&ihu kima tharttr il"S/Mmaah shittananbitu

wliose liorns are gleaming

lilie

the radiant sun,

kima kakkab shame nabu malu
(IV n.
27,

as the stars of heaven are filled with lustre.

No.

15-24.)

H. Y. HiLPRECHT.
Fkbrcary
15, 1896.

INTRODUCTION.

THE LOWEST STRATA OF EKUR.
Tlie vast ruins of the temple of Bel are situated on the E. side of the

now empty
distinct
differed in

bed of the Shatt-en-Nil, which divided the ancient city of Nipjxir into two
parts,^

At

various times the space occupied

by each of

the

two quarters

size considerably
era,

from the other.

Only during the

last centuries before the Christian

when the temple for the last time had been restored and enlarged on a truly grand scale by a king whose name is still shrouded in mystery,- both sides had nearly the
same
extent.

This became evident from an examination of the

trial

trenches cut in

different parts of the present ruins

and from a study of the

literary

documents and

other antiquities obtained from their various strata.

As

long, however, as the temple

of Bel existed, the E. quarter of the city played the more important role in the history of Nippur.

Out of the midst

of collapsed walls and buried houses, which originally encompassed
all

the sanctuary of Bel on

four sides and formed an integral part of the large temple en-

dosuie, there rises a conical

mound to
diibris.

the height of 29 m.' above the plain and 15 m. above
It is called

the mass of the surrounding
the prince ")*

to-day Bint-el-Am\r ("daughter of

ziggurratu or stage tower of Nippur,
'Layard {Nineneh and Babylon,
p. 551)

by the Arabs of the neighborhood and covers the ruins of the ancient named Imgarsag^ or SagasW^ in the cuneiform
and Loftus {Travels and Researches,
site

p. 101) stated this fact clearly.

Not-

witbstandiDg their accurate description, on most of our modern maps the
being confined to the E. side of the canal.
'

of the city

is

given inaccurately by

He cannot have
I.

lived earlier than

c.

500

B C,

and probably
is

later.

'Loftus's estimate of seventy feet

(J.
I.

c, p. 101)

too low.

*Layard,

c, p. 557.

Cf. Loftus,

c, pp. 102f.
\nler Imursag.

'"Mountain of heaven," pronounced
Part
"
1,

Cf.

Jensen

in SchTa,ieT' a Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek III,

and Horamel, Svmerisehe Lesetiucke, p. 26, No. 306. " High towering " (on the ending sfi cf. Hommel, I. c, p. 141, 3a). Cf.
p. 22,

note

5,

II
2,

E. 50, 5-6
15

a, b.

A third

name

existed

but

is

broken away on

this tablet (4 a).

For Iinyarsag

cf.

also

IV R.

27,

No.

and

17.

16
inscriptions (ef. Pis.

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCEIPTIONS

XXIX

and

XXX). A number
new

of Babylonian kings ^ applied
shrines, restoring old walls

themselves to (he care of this temple by building

and
the
the

repairing the numerous drains and pavements of the large complex,

nameofjEXv<r ("mountain house"].last three

But

the three great
all

known under monarchs who within
its

millenniums before Christ, above

others,' devoted their time

and energy

to a systematic restoration and enlargement of the ziggurrat and

surroundings, and

who

accordingly have

left

considerable traces of their activity in Nutfar,^ are Ashur(c.

banapal (G68-626 B.C.),' Kadashman-Turgu
B.C.)."

1250 B.C.)" and Ur-Gur

(c.

2800

The

structures of each of these builders have been, one after the other,

cleared, measured,

photographed and examined
director of the

in all their details

by Mr. Haynes, the
last four years.

intrepid

and successful

American expedition during the
in Series

He

is

soon expected to communicate the complete results of his work, iUustrated by

numerous drawings and engravings,

B

of the present publication.

There-

fore, referring all Assyriologists to this

proposed exhaustive treatise on the history of

the excavations, I confine myself to a brief examination of the lowest strata of ancient

Ekur, which

will

enable us to gain a clearer conception of the earliest phase of Babyit

lonian history.
his excellent

"Whenever

seems

essential,

Haynes's own words
in Philadelphia.

will

be quoted from

weekly reports to the Committee

UK-GUR.
At
It

the time of

King Ur-Gur

the ziggurrat of Xippur stood on the

X.-W. edge

of an immense platform, which formed the pavement of the entire temple enclosure.

was

laid

about 2.5 m. above the present level of the plain and had an average thick-

ness of 2.40 m.
'

In

size,**

color
No.

and texture the sun-dried and uninscribed bricks of
cf.

Among them Dungri
and
PI.

(PI- 53, 65),

133,

his brick legend in Part III of the present work),
11,

Ur-Ninib
his brick

(PI. 18,

No.

10,

XXIII, No.

Bur-Sin
,

I (PI.

No.

19),

Lshme-Dagan
(PI. 20,

(PI. 9,

No.

17, cf.

legend
(PI. 28, to the

in Part III),

Bur-Sill II
below.
1,

(Pis.

13f Nos. 30-33),

Kurigalzu

No. 38),

Raniinan-sliumusur
pp. 390f.).

No.

81).

Esarliaddon
cf.

(cf.

Vol.

X
2,

of the present

work and Hilprecht
7
PI. 28,

in Z. A., VIII,

As
No.

earliest builders
2

Cf

PI.

1,

No.

8

;

PI. 2,

No.

10

;

Pi. 20,

No.

38,

;

No.

81, 8

;

PI. 39,

No.

82,

8

;

PI. 51,

121, 8

;

also Jensen, Koamologie, pp. 185fF.
'

With the exception of
its

the

unknown

builder above referred

to,

who

enlarged the base of the early ziggurrat con-

siderably and changed

form entirely by adding a peculiar cruciform structure (each arm being 16.48 m. long by
its

6.16 m. wide) to the centre of
'Cf. Part
I,

four sides.

Each

side appeared to liave a gigantic wing.

p. 5, note,

and Noldeke

in Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 86, note 1.

^Cf

PI. 29,

No. No.

83,

and Hilprecht

in Z. A.,

VIII, pp. 389ff.
III.

Cf. PI. 24,
I li. 1,

8. 8.
,

His brick legend will be published in Part
Pis.

'Cf
"23
I.

No. 8f and

51f of the present work.

X

15 4

X

7.7 cm., practically the

same

size as

UrGur's

bricks found in the Buwariyya of Warka.

Cf

Loftus,

c,

p. 168.

XXX). story It is c. and Indipendently a similar result was reached p. c. E. also a 1 village or town A-mu-ur-rii^i in Meissnet. Ur-Gur himYet so long as the inside of the massive ruins has not been thoroughly explored.* Three of the stages have been traced and exposed (cf PI. a Babylonian this loanword in the Talmud.. doubt very much whether before Ur-Gur's time a ziggurrat existed iu ancient N'ippur.ibyl)nian ontract literature. The Babylonian means "No.- two longest sides faced l^'. this fact. is grammatically scarcely correct to derive ^'^1K. trace of a fourth story could be discovered. using in the manufacture of his bricks the mould of his predecessor. p.-W. f. 1894. Loftus.'^ and the four corners ])ointed approximately to the four cardinal points. I. 18). Cf. Egyptian by the trend of the Nile valley for (Hagen I. and that this king only repaired and restored an older building. very reason (cf. it foil etc. 'In size practically identical with Ur-Gur's structure in Muqayyar (ratio of 3 ' : '2).' second (leceding a little 6J m.r-sh'i-nu (Delitzscli. of N. X. in determining the four cardinal points. W. 129. from a supposed Babylonian ah'i(u)rra instead of li. Besides. it Ahidemie der WCssenschaften. although the absence of a ziggurrat in Tello favors Haynes's view. Tigris. . 4tf . 1301) like the and Schrader SUzuagsberichte der Kiinijl. 128). and accordingly could not very well designate " West" by a word which means in originally "back side " (Delitzscli. I. 246. 91)]. avurru [for Hebrews.-E. Assyrischei Ilindoiirterbuch.^ The base of Ur-Gur's ziggun-at formed a riglit-angled parallelogram nearly 59 Its m. )ws that the Babylonians luoked towards N. No. and S. I favor the former view and. c." in Beitrage zur Assyfiologiell. " West. *"The N. 45) but a-niur»Au nu^Wa'llS Babylonian 21). Loftus's even at Sargon's time. basis of Taylor's. wide. to and the accumulation oi In debris on the tDp of Biat-el-Aniii' is not enough warrant the assumption of more than three stages. p. p. Beitrage l)y zun Altbabylonischen Prhatrecht.. this 17 pavement are identical with the mass of crude bricks forming the body of the closely resemble the ziggiirrat. p." (Peters in The American Journal of Archaeology. in p. Haynes inclines to the view Ur-Gur was the strata builder of ter- ziggurrats in Babylonia. orientation corner is 123 e. I. The natural inference would be that self erected this large terrace to serve as a solid foundation for his lofty temple. (sic !) view of ^i^tAviu ri and <UuA-mnur-ra in tlie Tell el-Aniarna tablets (cf.. high. there remains a slight possibility that the body of the ziggurrat and the pavement existed before Ur-Gur." Uh{litan. note). Consequently the only possible reading a. races. and S. c.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. Hommel in Zeittchrift der Beatschen ilorgenl'andischen OeselUehaft XLIX. 13 e. who faced E. while the over 4 m. in the upper smaller side (or front) of a field faces N. while in size and general appearance they burned bricks which bear the name of Ur-Gur. The longest sides of the ziggurrat in Ur faced N. On the basis of the present almost convincing evidence. as the p. From connection with the observation tlut in the B. however. respectively. is p. from the edge of the former) and the third are so in use The lowest was 'The ancient name of the temple. Ur Loftus discovered but two distinct stages c. 524. p." as proposed by Delattre. proves nothing agaiast tliat this theory. Ekar. it As these two English excavators however did not examine the below Ur-Gur's will be wiser to suspend our judgment for the present. first On the and his own excavations. not a-\i?t. Halevy in Reoue SimUiq'ie III. *No large {I. in The Assyrian word "North. with Haynes. note 3.u. I read the bird mentioned in II 37. long and 39 m. Preussisch. 123. Cf Loftus. most cases was influenced by the course of the Euphrates and p. scarcely possible that formerly other stages existed above. 43.m(^v)urru. respectively.

high) consists of sixteen courses of (stamped) bricks and was In the middle distance of the picture by Kadashman-Turgu around the unprotected sides of the ziggurrat. (cf. 16 and note 3) with a tunnel tracing the face of the lowest stage of Ur-Qur's and Kadashman-Turgu's ziggurrat. 'The projecting casing wall built is at the base (1. side. side of the lowest stage. p. « Loft us.38 tliree m. Thanks to the untiring efforts of Ilayncs.18 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS no more be given. plainly showing that from time to time the faces of the ziggurrat were replastercd" (Flaynes. distant ' fi om each other. at its outer edge in bitumen.40 m. p. in shape and construction resemhling a smaller one discovered in a building to the S. note 9. c. the true meaning of which Loftus Nippur. I. which carried the water away (cf PI. 107). 1. Cf. which had an exter- nal facing of burned bricks of the same size. of which were stamped with Ur-Gur's well-known legend R. c. 129f. seen a section of the latest crude brick superstructure above.' By this very simple arrangement the was conducted in to a safe distance and the unbaked brick the foundations were thoroughly protected. Loftus. we learn that the ziggui-rat of Nippur in the centre of each of the three unprotected had water conduits of baked brick^ sides. facing of kiln-baked brickwork " (Loftus. 1 "Many outer end. lowest stage of the Buwariyya had the same height as that of the ziggurrat of Cf. c. and 7. * c.25 deep. 129.-E. mixed with cut straw. p.-W. Unlike the ziggurrat of Sin Ur. 1. canalis^ation Babylonian system of who for the first time examined the ancient ci-itically. 1 '"Where they joined the wall of the ziggurrat the distance between them m. which had its entrance on the N. c. men. (7 9. wide and gradually sloping outward from the ziggurrat towards a gutter. 74). p. p.-E. 1 other Babylonian structures" the lower stage of the Buwaiiyya "is without any external I. thick 10." to protect them against storm and "In places this plaster is still while in other places several coatings are visible. crude with the exception of the S.) was 65 m. falling rain XXIX. high.'- stated above.).'" at in order 3. To judge from the height of the " buttresses " in Waika. 1895). Two walls of burned bricks. 'In Ur the exterior of the whole lower story was faced by Ur-Gur with baked bricks (Loftus. greater than at Iheir . No. the I. I. pp. of the temple. while in I. long and 7 m. 16. 8. "Traces of decayed straw were discovered in these bricks " (Haynes. and was 28 cm. 169. ran nearly plaster of clay perfect.'' 2. it flunked the walls. wide by 3. They were found in the lower stage and possibly existed also in the upper' ruined portions. the body (and faces) of the zigguriat consist of small. Loftus. above. Report of Sept. 'Cf. No.75 On all four sides around the base of the walls was a plaster of bitu- cm. Report of Feb. Watka "unlike c. 129. As bricks. 5 failed to recognize.^ The whole ziggur- utterly ruined that the original dimensions can rat appears like an immense altar.* parallel. where 'This plaster rested upon "a level pavement of two courses of bricks also laid " (Ilaynes. 1894).-E. Each m.^ it To preserve snch a stiucture for any length of time it was necessary to provide with ample and substantial drainage. The surface of these stages " was covered with a very tenacious rain. p. 16.7 cm. 1894).'62 m.** ascent to thediffeient stages in Nippur was at the S. Report of Feb.

Bahyloniens inscriptions in the first and Naram-Sin iChronologie der Oeschiehte Israels. the two men must necessarily be closely associated with each other. note 1. Cf. • 19 right angles from the face of the ziggurrat. like the pavement' of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat. was another pavement consisting of two courses of burned bricks of uniform size and mould. led it. of Shargani-shar-ali. und Assyriera. 138. my arguments ' in favor of the identity of Shargani-shar-ali with Sai-gon father of BoUj tlie walls of the causeway and Uiose of the ziggurrat were battered. This enormous size is quite unique. This fact significant. among the more than twenty-five different forms of bricks used in ancient Nippur. . 30. 75) should never have been tlie made after the publication of their part of present work. I. 'Ilaynes. garden. Origin Cuneiform Syllabary. no longer into the in existence. The complete excavation of the inner wall will be undertaken in connection with the systematic examination and removal of the ruins around the zio:srurrat. in square and is 8 cm. which were never employed again in the buildings of Nip- and as they are found near together and intermingled in both courses of the same This pavement. up to thj top of the ziggui-rat open court in fi-ont of The whole temple enclosure was surrounded by a large inner and outer wall built of sun-dried bricks. 25f. His iusinuations against the priests of Nippur read like a carnival joke. in the light of the facts presented in the following sketch. Leipzig. 1894.) is impossible and The original picture of the sign Shar in our name is not " I'hifiroglyphe de and Development of the feui'. 3 A number of them contain the wellis known inscription Naram-Sin (Part pur. which extended up with crude and down to the great fortification of the temple. c). p. p.-W. into the larg^ open court. This causeway ^ was filled bricks of the same size and mould and formed a kind of elevated platform. orchard (kirxi). according to Ilaynes's Report of Feb." under the E. Immediately below "the crude brick platform of Ur-Gur. exactly half the hatter of the latter (1 :4). SARGON AND N ARAM-SIN. *0ppert'8 proposed reading of this was declined I'arbieen in Assyrinca. I.N". but an enclosed piece of land covered with plants. Fortunately most bricks of this pavement are stamped. name as Binganisar-iris {Revue d' Assyriologie III. 50 cm. I 'Niebuhr's very recent remarks on the historicity of Sargon ^ijyptens. 1896. To the . of Ekur "30 courses of these bricks are still plainly visible "They compose the ridge of the outer wall and.CIIIEPLY FEOM NIPPUR. Loftus. p. c. in other words a plantation. Cf. 8. Pis. from which apparently steps. As both kings used the same peculiar bricks. while the rest bears the briefer legend of I. and enables us to determine the approximate date of other structures built of similar material in other parts of the city.' Each brick measures c. 7. ancient brick pavement becomes therefore a new and important ' link in the chain of I. and II). corner of the ziggurrat. p. rest on an older foundation. Bertin. Keport of Sept. the hatter of the former (1 :8) heiag 9. thick.les" (Oppert. 1895. pp.

Ilaynes excavated and soon wall He selected a piece of 10 m. "at the foot of the enclosing wall. The foundation of the was placed f m. a ridge of low insignificant- looking mounds to the N. is 189)) it served as it a caravanserai for the accommodation and safety of pilgrims and their animals. 1894).-W. summer of 1895 Mr. The inner II R. indicates that this underground archive or cellar existed at Sargoa's time at that very spot and was rebuilt by Ur-Gur.ittle. Upon the top of this large which is c. Forschungen 111. K"© bricks of either of the two kings have been found below referred to them. As far as the present evidence goes. "show evident traces of red coloring on their under or inscribed face" (Haynes. It was " built of worked clay mixed with cut straw and laid up en masse with roughly on solid clay c. side of spring are this court. even more powerful witness of Naram-Sin's activity in Nippur has arisen from some ruins in On the plan of Nuffar published in Part I. was the constmcted by Ur-Gur. Report of Nov. Vio lag das Paradiesf p. It was apparently laid by Sargon and it relaid by his Naram-Sin. on the W. 221. as stated above. According to Haynes (Report of August Such a view c. a. long by 276 m. loag. fortifications. placed on a raised base of clay." I trust the day is not very far when he will regard cal and identical with Shargani-sbar-ali. Its real (III). to be of comparatively late date and cannot be applied to for the outer wall {shaVsu). p. PI. p. but etc.5 m." From the siza of the bricks. Of. to possible. b). fortification (duru) was called Imgur-Marduk {ibidem. Delilzsch. XV. reaching the Shatt en-Nil apparently not far from 2(5 A large open space.." 'Cf.^ Its upper part. sloping or battered sides " to a total height of base.^ ' it. than they can be traced on the map. 13. wide. c. sife refuge Perhaps behind its served both Besides in the time of war the inhabitants of Nippur readily found a walls. On the N. 5 m.20 l^arara-Sin^ (Part &on. 29. a diagonal wall of burned bricks. E. But another. was built before the spring to divert the course of drifiing sand and debris from the court. W. in length after- wai'ds rejjorted the following surprising results. b. received by the it temple administration as regular income and for special purposes. wide and covering more than acres of ground. by the mounds called Vlli and build- by tho temple complex ings.. II J{." was enclosed by this wall. the outer wall of the city. All the stamped bricks of Naram-Sin 24. which "appear to be the half bricks of filled to NaramSin. 'The brick stamp of Sargon. OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS pp. en-Nil at a very low level. 50. below the plain of the desert. as having been unearthed underneath the wall of Ur-Gur's archive. 23 a.50. two other names existed . Both names seem . six courses high. as I do. b. 29 a. I. bank of the Shatt. Naiam Sin's According to 30f. sheep." the spring existed at the time of this great builder. * Originally these mounds continued a little farther N. •Inscribed burned bricksof Naram-Sin were also found in mound X. " After the court had become a depth of about 1 m . of the temple' During the is marked YII. 5 J m. nor in fact any other inscribed objects that can be the neighborhood of Ekur. a bubbling spring was discovered. mentioned below. tliey turned to the W. purpose can therefore only be surmised. lower part of this rampart. They represent a portion of li^imit-MarduTc. a wall of the same enormous width. below the water level or c. 16-19). " 414 m. were kept and sheltered. seems me more probable to regard this enclosed place as a court where the numerous sacrifices. until suddenly II. and must therefore be rec- ognized as the true level of the Sargon dynasty in the lower strata of the temple at Nuffar. On either side of the still seen the brick platforms and curbs where the water pots resteJ. who utilized part of his father's bricks. made of sun-dried Sargon as histori- 'More recently torical basis of {Altorientaliiche 238) Winckler refers to Shargani sharali as the possible his- "the mythical Sargon of Agade. 5. this court was never occupied by any brick 3.75 m.

CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUH.
bricks,

21

was

raised to an

unknown

height.^

We

may
it

well ask in amazement,

Who was
else

the builder of this gigantic wall, constructed, as

seems, ana

um

sate ?

Nobody

than the great liTaram-Sin,
cal person
!

whom Niebuhr
will

of Berlin finds hard to regard as a historirelease

Perhaps this scholar

now

me from

presenting " wirkliche

Inschriften politischer

nnd

als soleher glaubhafter-

Natur, damit

man

ihrer [namely,
'

Sargon's and Naram-Sin's] einstmaligen Existenz vollkommen traue."

The

bricks

had exactly the same abnormal
tion of three lines.

size as the

burned biicks of the pavement below the

ziggui-rat and, in addition, although

unbaked, bore N'aram-Sin's usual stamped inscrip-

"

They

are dark gray in color, firm in texture and of regular form.
later king, constituting

In quality they are unsurpassed by the work of any

by

far the

most
our

solid

and tenacious mass of unbaked brick that we have ever attempted to cut
'

way

through."

A

large
'

number of "

solid

and hollow terra-cotta cones

in great

variety of form and color,"

and many fragments of water spouts were found

in the

debris at the bottom of the decaying wall.

The

former, as in Erech,'' were used for

decoration, the latter apparently for the drainage of the rampart.^

Possibly there
wall,^

were buildings of some kind on the spacious and airy summit of the
nothing points definitely to their previous existence.
'

although

I

c.

10.75 m. wide.

have summarized the details of Haynes's report, according to which the original base was c. 5 m. high and " Directly upon this foundation Naram-Sin began to build his wall, 10.75 m. wide and six courses
to us, the builder

high.

For some reason unknown
3

changed

his plan at this point

and widened the wall by an addition
c.

of

c.

m.

in thickness to the inner face of the wall,

making the

entire thickness or width of the wall

13.75 m.

This addition, like the original foundation, was built of worked clay mixed with cut straw, and from the clay bed was
built
this

up

to the top of the

moulded brick

wall,

making

a

new and wider
and
c.

base,

c.

5.5

m. high by

c. 13.7.)

m. wide.
attest his

Upon
work"

new and widened

base a

new

wall of equal width was built
c.

by Naram-Sin, whose stamped bricks
10.75 m. wide, there
is

manship.
to its

In the construction of the original base,
3,

5 m. high

nothing to furnish a clue
:

authorship " (Report of August

1895).

In the same letter
it

Ilaynes argues very plausibly, as follows
it

Had
it

the superstructure been built upon the original base, as
ture from
its

was begun,

would naturally appear that the entire structhe proportions of the wall,

foundation was

tlic

work of NaramSin

;

yet because

NaiamSin changed
to build

may

with some show of reason be assumed that NaramSin himself began

upon the foundation of a prede-

cessor, perhaps of his father Sargon,

with the intention of completing the original design, and that his

own

ideas then

began
' I

to fix

upon a

different or at least

upon

a larger plan requiring a wider base to build upon."

am

afraid Niebuhr's use of " politisch

" und " glaubhaft " as two corresponding terms

is

very " unhistorisch."
as a historical doc-

Apparently he has a very curious conception of the significance of an inscribed Babylonian brick

ument over
tion, p. 626,
' *

against the "political inscriptions " too often subjectively colored.

Cf.

Maspero, The

Dawn

of Vimliza-

with

whom
I.

I agree.

Carl Niebuhr,

c. p. 75.
8,

Haynes, Report of Sept.

1895.

'"Red and
27, 1895).

black color are abundant.

The hollow cones

are of larger size than the solid

cones" (Repoit of July

«Cf. Loftus,
'It
is

I.

c. p. 187ff.

doubtful whether the cones and spouts belonged to

Naram
tier

Sin's or Ur-Gui's structure

;

the water spouts

point to the time of the former, however.

'Ilaynes inclines strongly to the view that there

e.tisted

"a

of rooms flush with the outer face of the wall,
3, 189.j).

and a broad terrace before them overlooking the great enclosure" (Report of Aug.

This view

is

closely

22

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS

The

construction of so gigantic a fortification

by Naram-Sin proves
its

tlie

political

importance of Nippiir at an early time, and reveals, in
ious influence which

own

peculiar way, the relig-

Ekur

exercised in the ancient history of the country.

A number
g.,

of scattered references in the oldest cuneiform inscriptions extant
that the supreme god of Lagash
Tello,^ that
is

as,

e.

the fact

called
title

gad

lalil

by several kings and governors of
that Urukagina' as well as

Edingiranagin' bears the

mupadx Inlila-ge,

Entemena

'

built a shrine to Inlil, that the rulers of Kish,^ Erech"

and

of other early

Babylonian centres,' who lived about the period of the kings of Shirpurla, paid their
respect to B31, repeatedly

making valuable
**

offerings

and numerous endowments, and

claimed as im'esi gal Inlila

the right of chief officer in his sanctuary and domain

and the interesting passage

in the bilingual text

of the creation story,' where Nippur
find a

seems to be regarded as the oldest city of Babylonia,
the results obtained by our systematic excavations.

welcome confirmation

in

A

comparatively small portion of the enormous temple area has so far been thor-

ouo'hly examined, although for

more than

five

years the constant hard lab:)r of fifty to
to its exploration.

four hundred Arabic

workmen has been devoted
;

The

results

have

already been extra oidi nary
pleted.

they

will

become more so when our work

shall be

com-

That no independent buildings of Sargon have as yet been discovered will be The huge number of Sarpartly explained in the light of the statement just made.
gon's brick stamps^" excavated at different times chiefly within the temple enclosure,
connected wilh his theory as to the use of the court, aboye referred

to.

" In a hot country, infested with robbers and

swarming

willi insects, the

rooms on

tlie

wall and the terrace in front of them would have offered admirable sleeping

quarters for the hosts of pilgrims at Bel's most famous shriue (ibidem)."
^

E. g
1,

,

by Urulcagina [De Sarzec, Decouvertes
Amiaud, on
p.

en,

Chaldee,

p.

XXX,
;

squeeze

(cf. p. 109f.), col. I,

2

;

and

PI. 5,

No.

2f. (also

XXX)], Euaiiatiiina I
Sarzec,
I

[inscription published

by Heuzey

in

Revue d'Assyriologie
p. 148,

III, p.

3

,

2],

Eutcmeiia [De
Sarzec,
I.

c, PI. 31, No.

3, col. I,

2

and Revue

d' Assi/riologie II,

col. I,

2],

Enanatiiiua II [De
" 8 *

c, PI.

6,

No.

4, 2].

De De De

Sarzec,
Sarzec,

I.

c

,

PI. 31,

No.

2, col. I, 5f. (cf.
1,

Reoue

d' Assyriologie II, p. 81).

I.

e.,

PI. 5, No.

35-38

;

PI. 33, col. Ill,

1-3

;

squeeze

(p.

XXX),

col. Ill, 7-9.

Sarzec in

Revue

d' Assyriologie II, p. 149, col.

IV, 4-7 (to be supplemented by

De

Saizec, Decouvertes, pas-

sages quoted in the preceding note).
5

Hilprecht, Old Babylonian TuscripHons, Part II, PI. 43, No.
I.

3.

Cf. PI. 40,

No. 108.

«nilprecht,
'

c..

Pis. 38-42,

No.

87.
36f.,

B. g.. Ur, cf.

Iliiprecht,

I.

c. Pis.

No. 85

;

PI. 42,

No. 88 and No.

89.

Cf. also PI. 42,

No. 90

;

PI. 43,

Nos. 9 If.
«

Lugalzaggisi.

Cf. Hilprecht,

?.

c, PI. 38, No. 87, col.

I,

15f.

•Pinches
'"Not
less

in Records of the Pasf, Vol. Vf, p. 109, 6.

than eighteen (either whole or fragmentary) terracotta stamps have been unearthed, seven of them
in

within one fortnight
at

December, 1895.

Most of them are without handles.

Apparently several broke while
in

in

use

Sargon's lime and were then thrown away.

Otheis were doubtless broken intentionally

connection with the

disastrous event meotioncd below, p. 30.

CHIEFLY FROM KIPPUR.
his
'

-

23
title

stamped bricks found under the platform of Ur-Gur, and the regular
hit

MnP
that
of

Ekur

Btl in Nifjmv occurring

in all his inscriptions

from

IS'ufFar' indicate

important structures, similar to those of his son, must have existed
these high and extended accumulations.
ular spot have

in

some part

the bricks of

we to search for them ? And Ur-Gur lie directly upon the

The perplexing question is, at which particshall we ever really find them? Just as splendid structure of Naram-Sin in the
"the great crude brick platform of Ur-Gur's
This fact
is

large enclosing wall {Nimit-Marduli), so

ziggurrat practically rests upon Naram-Sin's pavement."^
for

of importance,

we draw the

natural conclusion from

it

that

all

the buildings that once stood upon

this latter

pavement were razed by Ur-Gur,

in order to obtain a level

ground
Ekur.

for his

own extended

brick pavement, which served as the

new foundation

for

THE PRPJ-SARGONIC PEEIOD.
The average accumulations of
a
little

debris above the

pavement of Naram-Sin measure

over 11 m. in height and cover about 4000 years of Babylonian history.
earlier

Have

any traces of an
found in Nuffar?

temple beneath the pavement of the Sargon dynasty been

Several sections on the S.-E. side of the ziggurrat have been exca-

vated by Mr. Ilaynes

down

to the water

level.''

I

am

therefore fully prepared to

make

the following statement, which will sound almost like a faiiy tale in the ears of Assyriologists

and historians who have been accustomed to regard the kingdom of Sargon

as legendaiy and the person of

Naram-Sin

as the

utmost

limit of our

knowledge of

ancient Babylonian history.

preserved drains,

The accumulations oi debris from ruined buildings, partly broken pottery and many other remnants of human civilization
soil

between Naram-Sin's platform and the virgin
"J'he

below, are not less than 9.25 m.

age of these niins and what they contain can only be conjectured at the present
first

'The fragment of the
No.
63.
It

Sargon hrick excavated

in

Nuffar

at the

beginning of 1894

is

published on PI. XXI,
it.

proves that Sargon did not only stamp his legend upon the bricks but sometimes wrote

For a stamped

specimen
'

cf.

Part

III.

Written ha

QIM^ (bo)bani or
example of

(ba-)ban, in other

words expressed by an ideogram and preceding phonetic comCf. Ililprecht, Assyriaca, p. 70, note (end).

plement (the

earliest

this

kind in Semitic cuneiform texts).

Examples
'

for this peculiar use of a phonetic

complement are extremely

rare

and

will be

found in Assyriaea, Part

II.

Pis. 1-3, Nop. 1-3.

*

Haynes, Report of Aug.

3,

1895.

In advance

I

warn

all

those

who seem

to

know Babylonian chronology
in their

better (?!) than

KingNabonidos of Babylon, not

to use this fact against the king's

3200 years, and to keep in mind

that also Ur-Gur,

Kadashman-Turgu and.Ashurbanapal follow each other immediately

work

at the ziggurrat.

'To
it

illustrate the

amount of

time, patience

and labor needed
m. and

for the systematic exploration of these lowest strata,

may

be mentioned that one of the sections excavated contained

"more than

60,000 cubic feet " of earth, which had

to be carried

away
5,

in basketfuls a distance of 120

at the

same time

to be raised to a height of 1.5-24

m. Ilaynes,

Report of Oct.

1895.

24. • Undisturbed by the hands of later in TJie builders.5 cm.02 m. Apparently mai'ked a sacred enclosure around the altar. Report »» of March 17.-E.^ At it a distance of nearly 2 m. Rcpoit of Feb. stood an altar of sun-dried brick. it had remained A similar conclusion was reached by Peters 1895.C. written out of the depth of this most ancient sanctuary of the : world so far known " We must cease to apply the adjective earliest to the time of his Sargon or to any age or epoch within 1000 years of advanced civilization. Cf. between the entrance to the zig- gurrat and the E.23 m. and 4 m. from the altar (in front of and 1.) high. 1895). Wilh an average length and breadth of 24." the convex surface. facing S. and was covered with a layer of white ashes (G. XXVIT. therefoi-e. below the level of NaramSin's pavement. to date the founding of the temple of B31 and the settlements in I cannot Nippur somewhere between 6000 and 7000 B./ possibly even llaynes' earlier. 2 Report of August 30. 36 cm. No. 3.' and reappeared under the W.-"W.* is They are laid in mud seven coui-scs (= 45 cm. 189'1)."^ " golden age of Babylonian history seems to include the reign of Sargon and of The Ur- Gur. below its bottom stood a large open vase It will serve as with rope pattern'" (cf. Report of Aug. pp. American Journal of Archaology X. ' Hajnes. of it Haynes discovered a kind of bin built of crude brick and likewise filled with (black and white) ashes to the it) depth of c. • "Being placed lengthwise and crosswise in alternate courses" (llaynes. 'Report of August • Wliich was 0. Aug. outside of this low enclosure and in terra-cotta c. corner. pp. 45f."^ Somewhat below by 2. 21. thick). doubtless the remnant of burned sacrifices. 'Tlie facts concerning this curb have been gathered from Haynes's Reports of Feb. 1894. 17. At T2). corner of the ziggur- The bricks of which this curb was built are j^lano- convex in form.5 X 18 cm. OLD BABYLONIAN INSCUIPTIOXS But as no evidence of an ancient ziggurrat previous to Ur-Gur and Naramfinal destruction Sin has been discovered. 31 and 44. 18C4 (alto Aug. Haynes. c." being placed upward in the wall. Peters. 17 and March 17. . To the S. wide. the accumulations must have necessarily been slower and presuppose a longer period than elapsed between Naram-Sin and the of Ekur in the first post-Christian millennium. do better than repeat own words. The American Journal of Archaology X. 1895. 1895. below the top was a low wall of bricks. in the fifth an excellent specimen of early Babylonian pottery millennium before Christ. PI. the pavement of Karam-Sin. Hayncs's cbcmical analysis of the while ashes showed evident traces of bones. ' " 3. first I do not hesitate.92 m. 30 cm. which " curiously creased lengthwise.4G m. a distance of 4. 1895. for " it extended far under the pavement of Naram-Sin rat. whose limits have not yet been found.24 time. high). long The upper surface of this altar ^ was sun-ounded by a rim of bitumen (18 cm.

high. at once. and after a terra-cotta vents brief search underneath the spot where the greatest number of these and cocks had been gathered. below the pavement of and 1.25 m. its ' la the form of a large jar. Cf PI. almost exactly under the E.57 m. At known its outer or discharging orifics hs found the most ancient keystone ai-ch yet in the history of architecture. below the l!^'aram-Sin. 24.-E. Report of Aug. 'The following facts have been g.-B. ' The arch is 71 cm. Nov. The bottom of level of this valuable witness of pre-Sargonic civilization" was c. which exhibit no trace of a door or opaning of any kind. 'Haynes. 24.ithered from Elaynes's Reports of Oct. . 1895. The question once asked by Perrot and Chipiez" and answered by them with a "probably not. March 3. . are made of large unbaked bricks of tenacious clay ' somewhat smaller in size than those of this building. ' below the level of NaramSin's pavement.^ A second vase of similar size but different doubt side. p. 20.. 234. below the pavement of Naram-Sin. stood another interesting structure. ^ A Hittory of Art in. 25 more than GOOO years.05 m. square. high. he came upon a drain which extended obliquely under the entire breadth of this edifice. While examining the surroundings of His curiosity was aroused Haynes found ten basketfuls of archaic water vents and fragments thereof on S. *Its foundations are tlierefore 3. and has a span of 51 cm. "Thoroughly mixed with finely cut straw and well kneaded. of the altar described above. To the S. diameter in the centre being larger than that at the top (Elaynes. 24." II. 4. Ur-Gur's crude brick platform.HI side and on a level with its foundation.33 m." has been definitely decided by the American expedition in favor of ancient Chaldsea. elliptical in form. 13. below the former and neai-ly double the distance from the ancient brick curb. Reports of Oct." Its splendid walls. on it. which stood in front of the altar. 1894. XXVIII. 7 m. below the foundations of the aforesaid building. S. 13. Chaldcea and Assyria. Another section of earth adjoining the excavation which had yielded these remarkable results was removed by Haynes. Nov. one behind the other as one approached served some common purpose in con- nection with the temple service at the pre-Sargonic time. its Naram-Sin's rampart. 1895).^ 7 m. in There its is little my mind that both vases.CHIEFLY FROM in its original upright position for JSTIPPUR. " with a symmatrical and double reentrant angle at northern corner and built up solidly like a tower.-S.' It is its 3 38 m. and a rise of 38 cm. 12. and it was buried under a fortified the mass of earth and dehris long before Sargon I was born and ISTaram-Sin temple of Nippur. It stood 3. Vol. pattern^ was discovered 77 cm. 1894 Jan. corner of Ur-Gur's ziggnrrat and immediately below the pavement of Naram-Sin.

are doubtless of a higher antiquity. is was found. the arch cannot be placed lower than 4000 B. of excavation. will be treated and time. Report of Sept.26 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRirTIONS 73. the bottom of the lower vase and the foundation of the massive build- ing were not on the same level. the to the elevated enclosure around the solitary altar. highly probable that a third vase stood at some this distance below the second. above the and as the section S. For the wall this arcli is placed was built of the same sun-dried bricks which compose this the body of the ziggurrat (Haynes.. which Prom the inscribed objects excavated in connection with (c.-E. PI. the buildings and objects described above were carried down to the virgin removed in their where water stopped our progress. that an inclined passage from the plain led alongside the two vases tery. cf. bronze and terra-cotta vessels. XV). and its The bricks of which it is constructed are well baked. facts obtained However may be. I determined that it must have existed at the time of the dynasty of Isin in 2500 B. is As the highest vase. and in it is all probability a good deal older. A few months after discovery the arch was forced out of shape.- An abundance of fragments of red and black lacquered liigli A kind of pointetl arch of unlinked brick (60 cm. Dec.-E. 14.70 depth of 7 m. stood 77 cm. p. side of the canal bed." Whether ancient arch the altar. the convex side being turned upward. on the other hand. Whether the 3200 ^-ears given by Nabonidos as the period which elapsed between his own government and that of altar.44 m. same age as the curb and vases. 229. especially fragments of copper. c. side of The lowest strata did not furnish any ti-easures similar to those found in the upper layers they showed a large proportion of black ashes and fine charcoal mingled with earth.C.C. I. bearing at another place ' human figures in relief upon their surface. on the it S. results. Sai-gon I. the character of which still shrouded in mys- The keystone arch and drain. plano-convex in shape. 92. wide at tlie bottom) was found by llaynes in it mound X (cf. .^ No. and 48 cm. Accoiding to my calculations and our latest news from the nearly 0. 21. be correct or not. Haynes it. all The two section sections which contained soil. Several pieces of baked clay steles. so much we can I is infer from the even now. of the settling mass above which had been drenched with rain water. but they also produced many smaller objects of great interest and the ziggurrat. 1895). " probably from the unequal pressure it. lower than the bottom 7.C. Another was below NaiamSiu's pavement (Report of Sept. A third neighborhood yielded similar But it is impossible to enumerate in detail all the antiquities which were nncovei-cd below the S. from them has not j'ct been excavated. am therefore disposed to assign to the tower-like building. ra.5 m. W. Reports of April 27. below the pavement of Naiiim-Sin and 2. had any at present field impossible to prove. reasoned correctly that was older than 2000 B.5). however. 189. From the depUi in which was discovered. value. under which the original connection with each other. The it is diffei'ence between them othei-. of the lowest trace of civilization (Haynes. within about 2 m. the two large vases and the massive building. 189j). In all probability it dates back to Ur-Gur's period.). Fig. Tor the general form of pointed arch Perrot and Chipiiz. at a 'One of Ibem was found discovered 7. of the arch. laid in clay mortar. .

was found 7. below the pavement of ISTararaSin. will clear our views on the devel- opment of pottery in Babylonia. But first of all. 1895). they again have brought vividly and impressively before our eyes the one fact that Babylonian civilization did not spring into existence as a deus ex lies machina^ that behind Sargon I and Naram-Sin there ering thousands of years .40 m. literally filled with potsherds of small size and generally brick red in ." The stratum whicli produced this vase. or at least ascribe declare them of Greek are.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. one would unhesitatingly origin. and near to a perpendicular let from the E. The results of our excavations in the deepest strata of Ekur will change the cur- rent theory on the origin and antiquity of the arch. high.^ "Had these pieces been found in the higher strata. " was color " (Report of Sept. and will throw some welcome rays on one of the darkest periods of history in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates. 23 cm. to 8 m. below this pavement "directly beneath the line fall of the very ancient curb. a long and uninterrupted chain of development covrulers of the fourth millennium civilization." For they of great excellence and in quality far superior to those found in the strata subsequent to the period of Ur-Gur. far from leading us back to " the dawn of but two prominent figures from a middle chapter of the early history of Babylonia." are at the best and that these two powei-ful before Christ. 27 pottery was discovered at a depth of 4. corner of the altar. 14. ' A vase of ordinary gray pottery.G m. according to Haynes. them to the influence of Greek art. as a rule.

-E. to restore the important inscriptions pub- on the following pages (particularly Pis. Mr. above the platfoi-m of Ur-Gur. side of the ziggurrat.^ were found in a stratum on the S. and there can be no doubt "that the room was a vault entered by means of a ladder. THE INSCRIBED MONUMENTS OF SARGON'S PREDECESSORS." ' reaches a height of m. wide and 2. proof below. 'Stamped bricks being excluded. Although more than 500' mostly fragmentary predecessors have been excavated in Nuffar.60 m. while platform. 1 pavement of Ur-Gur. dence and for various other reasons. long. small that during the last three years it Most of the fragments are so needed my whole energy and patience. 36-42). details all But if we examine the fact. more Almost these we will easily find the explanation of this remarkable monuments that. all it antiquities of Sargon and his may at first seem strange that nearly of them were discovered out of place. . must be ascribed to this early phase of Babylo- nian history. » Haynes. this The apparent relation in will which stratum stands to a peculiar building in its immediate neighborhood furnish the key to the problem. of the zig- Haynes discovered recently a room 11 m. It showed nowhere a door or entrance in its unbroken walls. above this Few of the objects found were whole. Directly below the great fortification wall of the temple to the S. high. 14. the mass of them was broken and evidently broken and scattered around on purpose. 1895.28 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCKIPTIONS II. stairway or other perishable passage from above. on the basis of strong pala^ographic eviclosely. •Cf.-E. 3. This stratum varies in thickness. AN ANCIENT TEMPLE ARCHIVE. " In some places in other places it it lies directly upon the crude brick c. Report of Dec." and yet it was made of the same bricks which coinpose the gurrat. com- bined with lished much sacrifice of the eyesight. between the facing of the latter and the great fortified wall which surrounded the temple.54 m." This structure " was erected on the level of Naram-Sin's j)avement.

body of Ur-Gur's ziggiirrat 29 By the be explained? simple assertion. consisted of crude bricks capped ' This ledge existed in both chambers. serving as a shelf *' for the storage of objects in due form and A ciicular clay tablet together with two small tablets of the ordinary form it. 21. . 14. 'The '•'It with the distance between the tops of Ur-Gur's and Naram-Sin's platforms."' A ledge wide and 0. 14. size. entirely order. In the midst of this lower chamber was "a hemispheri- cal basin of pottery set in a rim of stone. note 2. this cellar. this c. filled inscribed pebbles. entirely with his own And as he raised the foundation of his ziggurrat far above the old level. is only 2. cylinders. suggested already by the absence of a door in the walls of the is and platform. 1895. 1893). nor was it built by this king himself or by his immediate successor. antedate Sai-gon.CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUR. Report of Dec. Fiom the fact that the bricks of both rooms are identical "in ' form and sreneral appearance.^ the vault level. together with the yearly rains. high in their present ruined condition. at the same time widening the space between its two longer walls. p. It was built up with the walls and by a layer of burned bricks (Report of Dec." the original use of which is still unknown (Report of Dec 14. 1895). How this discrepancy to building. and the walls are 92 cm. however. In its present form this lower cellar cannot. above. 189o. statues. deep. above tlie floor extended around the room. a cellar reaching from the top of Ur-Gur's access from above being this platform on the down Ur-Gur to the level of Naram-Sin's pavement. had ruined the vault'* dation afterwards and laid it —he changed its foun- on a higher level. 31. 'Ilaynes. the principal enemies of Babylonian sun-dried brick structures. 18D5). or archive of the temple. it lies wholly below the level of Naram-Sin's platform.* (2) Ur-Gur found and used bricks. And finally a similar room etc. 20. that the room was underground. it is clear that The was built by king himself Our interest in the unearthed building is still increased by the discovery of another it. ' * Haynes." and that a brick stamp of Sargon was discovered beneath the founda- tions of the lower walls. he also raised the walls of the old chamber to the height of his (3) new platform. It can be easily proved that " underground building was the ancient storeroom 0. Report of Dec. For some unknown reason —probably because the jjressure of the neighboring temple fortifications from above. wide. this theory it *0n can be easily explained why a few tablets were found on the ledge of the lower room and brick stamps without handles were discovered on the floor of the same room.75 m. smaller- room of exactly the same construction and material below later vault Separated from the by a layer of earth and dchris 60 cm. lieight of its walls agrees was discovered by de Sarzec. In the lower vault (Haynes. and five brick stamps without handles were with about 30. 1894..5 m. as indicated by the piesence of his stamp below the level of his dynasty. Report of Dec."' and five fragments were found on its walls. Cf. we draw the following conclusions : (1) At the time of Sargon but rebuilt it a cellar existed at this very spot.15 m.000 clay tabin a lying within lets.

p. 21. For Burcenturies it Sin II wrote his before name on an unhewn block of diorite. except door-sockets in diorite. 13. Retue d'Auyriologie : III. presented to Bel many by Lugal-kigub-nidudu. etc. and tliat Ine-Sin was the immediate predecessor of Bur-Sin was inferred by Scheil from a contract tablet {Recueil XVII. note 3). 3. 65-68. I and Part Cf. and of the history of the city of Nip- pur at the time of Ine-Sin. 80. have been offered Tello. "Table of Contents. and from the extraordinarily small size of most fragments. did not antedate Ur-Ninib's government. 58. 'Cf. regulierement superposees sur cinq six rangs d'epaisseur. No. 87 and above. Cf. 2. The archive existed however as late as the second dynasty of Ur. a pre-Sargonic' king of Ur and Erech. se coupant a angle droit. long before. Cf. I have examined about 3000 of these tablets myself. But not less than c. I. Bur-Sin II and Gimil (Krit)-Sin" ' in particular." 'The thievish Arabs seem to have scattered their rich harvest everywhere. remplissaient des galeries ^iroites. 49. 127. It is therefore clear that the destruction of the vases. from the fact that none.' The vault of Nippur had been robbed by barbaiians of the Christ." That the archive could not have been defrom a study of the general his- stroyed in the brief interval between Ur-Ninib and Bur-Sin II.: 30 small OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS mound at Tello.^ by which the but it true character of our building is determined bein finding yond question. as previously stated. The mention of the devastation of Shashru on this Tello tablet is only of secondary importance in itself. 10. always remain a serious loss to science that the contents of the archive of Tello could not have been saved and kept together. brick stamps. America within the ' last year. however scanty our sources. and turned into a door-socket for his own shrine in Nippur. chamber excavated ou All the in Tello Cf. below.000 me for sale by dealers of Asia. third millennium before and indications Nearly in the all the objects above referred to were excavated from a well-defined stratum neighborhood of this storeroom. f. pp." p. and below. PI." p. The French explorer was more fortunate than Mr. As no document later than his time has been rescued from this stratum. Europe and p. were whole. No. *For the proof Sargon of this statement cf. Part I. as I infer from the following facts 1. 47 (No. Bur-Sin II repeated only what had been done by 1). sur lesquelles s'etendaient d'aulre couches de seuiblables monuments. The description of Ihis archive may find a place here " Ces plaquettes de terre cuite. it becomes evident that the contents of built at the the archive were broken and scattered intentionally. pp. Heuzey. Ililprecht. as the same event II follows "That Giniil-Sin was the diiect successor of Bur-Sin from . so that the latter might have rescued his block from the ruins. p. Part I. niais voisins I'un de I'autre.^ and this an inscribed brick of Ur-Ninib was found among the fragments recovered from stratum. PI. Haynes will his archive undisturbed. Les galeries formaient deux groupes distincts. 38. Three of the rulers of the dynasty of Isin temple of Nippur. it is also manifest that the deplorable disaster occurred not too long after the overthrow of his dynasty. They all come from l(i.. From the position in which they were found. note 1. "Table of Contents. conslruites en briques cms et garnies des deux coles de banquettes. results tory of that period. to So far. Recent Research in Bible Lands.

6). 10. °P1. lugal pate-si An-sha-anl<l-ge ba-tug by "annee ou du roi devint reject it patesi dans le pays (in d'Anslmn. 5." Deliizsch. Rev. "to take a wife... * On a tablet in Constantinople written at the time of Ine Sin. 6. 18-21) settles the question." The king may have conquered two countries far distant from each other in the _ same year. p." Notwithstanding that Homniel (Aus der babylonitchen Altertumskunde. 13-14. Untenuchnngen. Rev. ' 18 (Ine Sin). b) reproduce this translation. 4. Rev. PI. it IneSin ruled wanting. possible. Obv. years.'' LnluM'. 125. 37 f. c. . in is evident from the many business contracts executed everywhere Babylonia and from certain statements contained in them. Assyrisches IJandicorterbucfi. 3 rcsp. 55. opens with "the year which Bur-Sin became king. PI. col. in (2) In case a year was not which a list certain event took place (ushsa). (3) As we expect Cf. 31 three kings mentioned devoted their attention to the interests of InHl and Ninlil and other gods won-hiped in l^ippiir." p. Rev. resp. chronological list PI. memes parages que la oil la stele deZohab fixe lepaysdeLulubi. 55. 9-11 : >//a dauna '«<!'" Lvluli unhamkitu ina kakki. CHIEFLY FEOM NIPPUR. which grammatically in is p. As. 58. I. and especially Obv. 55. I.dingirSin lugal Drumki-mage mada Zaap-shalV'i mugul-a "In the year when (Gimil-Sin became king and ' =) King Gimil-Sin brought evil upon the land of Zapshali. Geschichte identification of and especially WinckUr. Harshi'''. in BurSin's sixth year. to marry. p. 43). No. No. a part of is will be safe to assign a reign of 50 years to Bur-Sin II ruled at least twelve years (PI. resp. mdiuAmurri. p. The concountries of stant references to successful expeditions carried on by Ine-Sin against the and Shashru^'. PI. 58. 137. 125. PI. 18-20. 37. No. such a year Cf. resp." this If the king accomplished something worth mentioning in the year of his accession. But the fact that this conquest is phiccd between BurSin's accession to the tlirone and a very characteristic event at the close of Ine-Sin's govern- ment him. 9). 58. kashid (cf. 2. In connection with Anslian may be mentioned that Sclieil in liecueil XVII. No. Rev. Obv. far more probable {Au» der hahyUniichen Altertumskunde. 125.' That the country as a whole was quiet and enjoyed peace and prosperlists (PI. for the present Schcil in Recueil XVII. Anslian''' by Bur-Sin II (e. 127. is p. MwH^ffirQijnU. cliaracterized by an quoted as "joined to" or " following" the previous year in 7-8. 3. 11 . No. as we learn from excavated bricks and door-sockets No. 58. Nuffar and other Babylonian mounds. in a arranged chronologically. No. p. however. p 38 (especially note G). For (1) events which happened more than once are quoted in their consecutive order. No. 58. la fille translated PI. Rev.^ Karhar^'. g. 3 and 10 . g. but often separated from each other by other events which occurred between them. Cf. No. Obv. 16 f. 13 Rev. 'Cf. 4. Rev. and in all probability not more than is sixteen to eighteen That the events mentioned on the two tablets are arranged chronologically. 127. resp. 3 (Bur-Sin II). Scheil. note Hommel's Simurru with Simyra in Pheiiicia by . and translate "In the year when the cf. PI. Scheil (Recueil XVII. From the fact that Simurru and LuluhuaTe here mentioned les together. 55. 127). and PI. Eduard Meyer. Anshan married a daughter of the king {lug = alhzu. we read the following date : mu Simu-ur-ru-um>^i Lu- lu hu^iba yul. 15 (between the two similar events event prominent enough to give it its lie twenty-eight years!). shalilu Kaahuhl) and led to curious conceptions about the land de» Allerthums. Cf. 17. 127). p. 38) draws the conclusion that "Sinuiru setrouvait done dans Tiiis assertion is by no means proven. 4. 55. is name. also Peters in The American Journal of Arcliaology X. 37 (beginning). Amunx 2). 5 and Rev. on 125. according to the c. 55. Cf. 9) and Sayce The Academy of Sept. ity under their government. Rev. 4 : deed was added. p. 10 it . Hay. (cf. 329. 21. beyond question. Rev. 11-12. Rev. 16-17.' from two chionological (PI. No. 5 and 11. «. 55. 9: mu dumuaal 7. occurred at other times Simurrum'". it at least forty-one years. PI. No. 127. I on the ground that there no evidence that ancient Babylonia : women were permitted to occupy the highpatesi of est political or religious positions independently. is 1805. 12 f ). I call attention to Scheil's theory in order to prevent conclusions similar to those titles which for several years were draw n fiom the of Nebuchadrezzar I (col. 125.^ and from the large number of dated conti-acts discovered in Tello.

why the Elamites soon afterwards of the temples when they defeats. the site of the ancient archive chamber was long forgotten and buried under a thick layer of debris. resp. 4. entirely. I. a number of other tablets which belong to members of the same dynasty.32 OLD BABYLOKIAN INSCRIPTIONS against Urhillum}'.-E. 2 Rev. Cf. but cannot yet be referred to definite kings. p. 58. 15). . ff. Scheil. note 4. such a terrible havoc and cities of theii. XII.. C8 convince myself of the correctness of his views. No. Elam and other between four natural boundaries defined in Part title is p. and the kinps of the second dynasty title is same reason as Dungi. 9) is mentioned in con- nection with a daughter of IneSin on PI. and who doubtless in consequence of their in the possession conquests assumed the proud all " king of the four quarters of the world. Akkad 3.. 127. pp. understand meaning— is practically contained in that of " king of the four of quarters of the world " (Part pp. *In view of all these facts above mentioned. 6 . 58. p. The title of Sumer and Akkad—as I. 8.. e. Obv. shar kibrat atba'im (Z. Ur dropped it therefore for As to the meanings of p. mention KimasTi''''. the the Hommel (whose latest opinion briefly stated in liis Aus der bahylonischen AUertumskunde. 201-243. A . also the statements of the acrei)led two chronological If Winckler's theory as to the seat of the it). No. Obv. 01)V. 15. 14. and to believe that tricts kings tlie who were the lords of S. 38. 18-27 and Pis. p. c. as they did not possess is Sumer and in also lost (I. p. c. " Table of Contents. was situated at the edge of a branch of the Shatt-cn-Nil outside of the great S. Syria. GO Nos." <8 (PI. they were not confined to Ur. not because they had Sumer and Akkad. Humurti' and Huhu{nu)ru'''' '^ as devastated or invaded by Babylo- nian armies. Notwithstanding all 8) and I agree differing from Winckler csrecially in interpretation of 8?iar kibrat arba'im and shar riuUuShumeri u because I Akkadi in tlie oldest Babylonian insciiplions down to Hammurabi. 24 f ). wall of the temple of Bel. ••'PI. room. resp. Eridu B.testify to the same effect. I have been unable pp. . No. were discovered. Obv. Whatsoever our position may be as meaning of and other impossible dis- titles. 133- 142. and to his previous papers on tlie same subject siue aud aji^ain.^ and by Gimil (Krit)-Sin against ZapshaW'''. III. No. VII. Part I. 2) and in Nippur (cf. 125. 368). 127. ira et stiulio again Tiele (Z. No. 7. but because they owned more than its the old indicated.) and I apparently reached similar conclusions on this important question. the kings of the second dynasty of Ur possessed the south of Babylonia. The cily of Marhathi (in N. That 1. 'Cf. s/tarrtiJ kibrat irbitli title was generally (Hommel apparently does not accept the second dynasty of to the Ur by this it is this very would also have claimed N. as a n)atter of fact. that. ShasTiru''' and Bite-tar (J)Jvii''. when he assumed the different titles. Moreover.enemies they simply retaliated and took revenge 4. or rather read and studied \m Altorientaliiche Forschungenlll. I. ' Cf. Hommel will doubtless change his view (tliat the kings of the second dynasty of Ur "were apparently confined to this cily.. own store- the votive objects published on Pis. but possessed the whole south proven by their buildings lists). p. also Peters in The American Journal of Arclueology X.^ The destruction of the archive under discussion must therefore have taken place between the overthrow of the second ' PI." should not have been entirely diflferenl). 55. 94).* Several of these cities and districts w^ere situated on the east side of its the Tigi'is and must be sought in Elara and to understand neighboring countries. Lchmann {Shamathshumuhin. lost I of Babylonia (the case of Gudta Thekingsof the second dynasty of Ur changed the tiUe of their title predecessors. now invaded Babylonia made "VVe begin . Babylonia and conquered parts of Arabia. p. "). Hommel (J..). in which all Their f. for their own former losses and When the Cassite kings conquered Babylonia. Babylonia. according to Homrael. Syria. 35. A. I.

CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.

33

dynasty of

Ur and

the beginning of the Cassite rule in Babylonia.
is

The

history of the
single

temple of Bel during this period

enveloped in absolute darkness.

No

monu-

ment of the members of the
been excavated in NufFar.

so-called first

and second Babylonian dynasties has yet
could

Apparently our temple did not occupy a very prominent

place during their government.

And how

it

be otherwise

?

Their rule marks

the period of transition from the ancient central cult of BSl in
rising cult of

Nippur

to the
live

new

Marduk

in

Babylon.

Bel had to die that Mardnk might

and take

his place in the religious life of the united country.

Even

the brief renaissance of the

venerable cult of " the father of the gods " under the Cassite sway did not last very
long.
It ceased again as soon as the national uprising

under the dynasty of Pashe

led to the overthrow of the foreign invaders,

who had

extolled the cult of Bel at the

expense of Mai-duk in Babylon,' and to the restoration of Semitic power and influence
in

Babylonia, until under the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon and xVshurbanapal a last
in the

attempt was made to revive the much neglected temple service
Ni^jpur.
5.

sanctuary of

The breaking and

scattering of the vases point to a foreign invasion and to a

period of great political disturbance in the country.
ill-disposed

No

Babylonian despot, however
in the

toward an ancient

cult,

and however unscrupulous

means taken

to

suppress

it,

would have dared to commit such an outrage against the sacred property
In
all

of the temple of Bel.

probability therefore the ancient archive

chamber of the
(c.

temple was ransacked and destroyed at the time of the Elamitic invasion

2285 B.C.),

when Kudur-Nankhundi and
That which
able
in the
its

his hordes laid

hands on the temples of Shumer and Akkad.

eyes of these national enemies of Babylonia appeared most valu;

among

contents was carried to Susa' and other places

what did not

find favor

with them was smashed and scattered on the temple court adjoining the storehouse.

From

the remotest time until then apparently most gifts had been scrupulously pre-

served and handed

down from
rites,

generation to generation.

Only those movable objects
in

which broke accidentally
nection with religious

in the regular service, or

which purposely were buried

con-

may be

looked for in the lowest strata of Ekur.

AGE OF THE INSCEIBED MONUMENTS
Having explained why
the most ancient documents so far excavated in Nuffar were

found in pieces above the platform of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat, I now proceed to determine
the general age of these antiquities and their relation to the inscriptions of Sargon
'

I.

Cf.

Part

I,

pp. 30

f.

'Cf. Parti, p. 31.

:

34

OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS
inscriptions

The
less

Xos. 86-112 have many palaeographic features

in

common and

doubt-

belong to the same general period, the precise extent of which cannot be given.
groups, however,

Two

may

be clearly distinguished within

it,

diffeiing

from each other
(ibid.,

principally in the forms used for

mu

(Briinnow, List 1222) and

dam
two

11105).

Instead of the two familiar Old Babylonian characters, in
lines

mu

the

pairs of parallel

found at or near the middle of the horizontal
;

line,

sometimes cross each other

(Nos, 92, 5
line

98,

3 ; 99, 4

;

101, 3, etc.), while

dam

occasionally has a curved or straight
;

between the two elements of which
;

and 5

cf.

No.

94, 3).^

composed (No. Ill, 3 and 6 Ko. 98, 2 This peculiar form of dam has so far not been met with outside
it is

of a very limited

number of
its

inscriptions from JS'ippur; that o£

mu

occurs also on the

barrel cylinder of Urukagina," although in a

more developed

stage.

Whenever one

of these characters has

peculiar form in an inscription of Nippur, the other, if

accidentally occurring in the

same

inscription, also has its peculiar

form as described

above

(ef.

No.

94, 3

and

4

;

No.

98,

2 (5) and 3

;

No. Ill, 3 and

0).

The two

char-

acters represent therefore the

same peiiod

in the history of cuneiform writing, to the

end of which the cylinder of Urukagina also belongs.
definitely fixed.

This period has not yet been

As various historical considerations seemed unfavorable to placing this
Jensen provisionally placed him before them;*
later,

luler after the other kings of Shirpurla,

Heuzey was less

positive

;''

HommeP

and Winckler" regarded him as

while

Mas-

but without giving any reasons, made him " the first in date of the kings of Lagash." ' Aside from the reasons given by Jensen, and a few simipero, without hesitation,
lar

arguments which could be brought forth

in favor

of his theory, the following pala1

ographic evidence proves the chronological arrangement of Jensen and Maspero to
correct
1.
'

e

The

peculiar foi-m of

mu

occurs in inscriptions from Nippur which,
I rt-fer to

if deterKeilschrift,
OG, 4
; ;

Tliis short line,

about the i-ignifJcancc of which

my

greater woik, Genehichte

und Syttem der
(No.
93, 6
;

was

oiigiiially curved,

berame then

straight and

was

later jilaced at the

eud

of the character

113,

12), finally

developing into a

full sized

wedge (De

Sarzeo, iJecouvertes en ChaUee, PI. 26,
is in

No.

1, col. II, 1

Heuzey

in litvue d' Atfyriologie II, p. 79,

No.
1).
I,

1,

13 [a duplicate of this inscription
this line
;

M.
1 13,

I.

O
is

,

Constantinople], and the

present work. No. 123, Obverse,
^

Sometimes
7
;

is

entirely omitted (No.

6).

De

Sarzeo,

I.

c, PI. 32, col.

col. II, 1, 4, 12
is

col. Ill, 3, 7.

The foim

of

mu

more developed

in

Uruka-

gina's inscription, indicating that the latter

somewhat later than the corresponding Kippiir texts.
is

On

the other

monuments
^ *

of Urukagina the regular Old ISabylonian form

used exclusively.
1, p. 8.

In Schradcr's KtilinsclirifllicJie Bibliothk, Vol. Ill, Part

Formerly he regarded

hiin as decidedly later than the other kings of
:

Lagash

(in

De
que

Saizec. Lecouvertes en Challe roi

dee, pp. 110, 112).

More

recently he expressed himself as doubtful
celle

"II en resulte
roi

Ourou kaghina

dolt

etre tenu, soit

pour appartenir a une dynastie anleiieurc a
le titre

du

Our-Nina,
II, p.

soit

pour

avoir, apies I'lipparilion

des premiers palesi, relcA^
'

royal a Sirpourla" {Revue d' Asiyriologie

84).

Getchichte Babylouiens

und

Jstyriens, pp. 290f.
p. 41.

" OescfiieJite
'

Dabyloniens und Ani-yrieno,
cf Cimlization,
p. 004.

Ihe

Dawn

;

CHIEFLY FKOMNIPPUK.
mined by the character of dam
seiiptions of Tello.
alone,

35
than the royal in-

must be

classified as older

The form of mu employed in Urukagina's cylinder does not occur in any other inscription of Tello. The cylinders are therefore to be regarded as older than the
2.

other monuments,

if it

can be shown that this peculiar form of
'

mu

represents a

more

ancient stage of writing
certain lines in
3.

and did not originate from an accidental prolongation of
scribe.'-

mu by

a careless

The very pronounced forms cut
first
it

iu stone vases (as,

e. g.,

found in Xo. 98, 3

101, 4; 92, 5, and
dent.

of

all

in

No.

94, 4) force us to eliminate the element of acci-

But, besides,

can be proved by an analysis of the character
is

mu

itself that

the

regular Old Babylonian sign
form.

only a later historical development of a more ancient

The

corieet interpretation of the original picture will, at the

same

time, enable

us to catch an interesting glimpse of certain prehistoric conditions in ancient Shumar.

According
(Briinnow,

to Houghton,'^ a close relation exists
I.

between the character

for

mu

and

hii

c, 2014)

and the

first

part of the character for
this

nam

{ibid.,

2087).

I trust

no Assyriologist of recent date has ever taken
problem very
acters
seriously.

attempt at solving a palasogi-aphic

and

is

The sign for nim has no connection with the other two charno compound ideogram, but, in its original form, represents a flying bird
Since in Babylonia, as iu other countries of the ancient world, the

with a long neck.*
future

was

foretold

by observing the

fliglit

of birds, this picture became the regular

ideogram for " fate, destiny " {shhnhi) in Assyrian.
the other hand,
is

The

original picture for mu,

on

no

bird, but

an arrow whose head foi'merly pointed downward, and
or symbols of crossed lines as are
in the religious

whose cane

shaft bears the

same primitive marks

characteristic of the

most ancient form of arrow used

ceremonies of

the N^oi-th American Indians.'^

As

the shaft

was represented by a
which

single line in

Babyforms of

This argument

is

conclusive, as

llie

theory, according to

later writers occ.isionally imitate older
is

cuneiform (or linear) characters,
against
'

in the sense generally

understood by Assyriologists,
Cf.

without any foundation and

all

the

known

facts of IJahylonian

paUcography.

my

remarks

in

Part

I,

pp. 12f.

Jensen's hesitation, so far as founded upon the form of the character ka, can be abandoned, as the form of this
is

character

surely far older than Gudea.
the Society of Biblical Archceology Vf, pp. 4G4f.
in the inscriptions of Tello in existence,

"In the 7'ransaclions of
*This
picture
fact

becomes evident from a study of the oldest forms
(or was) in

and Nippur.

The

original

is still

found on the most ancient Babylonian document
It is
llic

unfortunately scarcely

Assyriologists.

possession of Dr. A. Blau and

was

publislied
is

by Dr.

known among W. Hayes Ward in the
no "swallow" (Ilom-

Proceedin.g» nf the American, Oriental Society, October, 1885.

The

bird represented

tlierefore

mel, Smnerische Lesestucke, p.

6,

No.

67),

but a large bird with a long neck, such as a goose or a similar

water

bird

found on the Babylonian swamps.
as the flying bird

Later our picture was also used as the idiiogram for "swallow," designating her

par

excellence, as the bird nearly

always

in

motion when seen at day time.

'As

I

learned through the courtesy of Mr. Frank Hamilton Gushing of the Bureau of American Ethnology in

the Smithsonian Inst'.luiion at Washington.

After a correspondence on this subject

it

became evident

that

we had

XXIf. 'Because made of bulrushes. therefore. pp. in piclure To the tlie fame conclusions which as to the oldest form and significance of the arrow writing by pursuing entirely different lines of research./o{ / . A treatise on the ceremonial use of the arrow among the Indians. 94. however. and religious ceremonies of But how to be explained that our ideogram does not in mean "arrow" writing proper at all. with shaft of an arrow its peculiar shape and use.^ their names documents. 98. become therefore conclusive the original form of the character mu. while the inscriptions published in the present work as Nos. the regular form is —^^^—^ For it is developed at a later time. by short- ening the crossed lines. Instead of J=' j^ J^. but signifies "name?" Just as the picture of a flying bird its was used exclusively with reference to religious significance. growing abundantly along tlie marshes and canals of lower Babylonia. 111 are still older than Urukagina. quote from Mr. ^Gf on this whole subject Gulin. 101." so the arrow with the marks or symbols of ownership (originally two crossing lines ') carved on the shaft became the regular association of ideas led to exactly ideogram for " personality " or " name. fiom which. . The correctness of this explanation assured by the otherwise inexplicable absence of an impossible to conceive that a people Ideogram for ussu." the The same same symbolism and usage among the North American Indians. with whom "the arrow " is the symbol of personality. They all show so many pahvographic features in bolh reached common that they must be classified as an inseparable group. has developed out of the hollow' figures. " arrow. Cushing's letter the interesting fact that the above drawn arrow with two pairs of crossing lines on its shaft is called by the Zuni a'thlua "speeder (commander) of all " (namely. Gushing. To Prof. Stuan Culiii I am indebted for recent information on this subject. Still used with the same significance to legal in Europe and America by persons who cannot write. by Mr. if they have to afB. The interval between him and the following rulers of Tello who style themselves " kings " cannot have been very great. according to Gushing. we find. destiny. Ciishing's own investigations and long resi- dence among in regard to tribes still practice many of the ancient primitive I rites and customs. 90. ' is in press. using the bow in their system of writing should have altogether excluded the arrow." in Assyrian. it is From palaographic and other considerations therefore certain that Urukagina lived before the ancient kings of Shirpuria. role in the daily life is it which played such a conspicuous ancient nations in general. 99.36 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS mark carved upon its Ionian writing. corroborated by Mr. of all the other arrows used in their religious ceremonies)." It becomes now very evident that the Babylonian seal-cylinder. My arguinents. The crossed lines on the Indian arrows have a deep religious significance. marked with symbols and artistic and is but a continuation and elaboration in a more form of an ancient primitive idea. . Brinlou and Mr. the original " surface had to be drawn across it. Dr. in order to express the abstract idea of " fate. 92. 91. Korean Oamen.

. col.) with Entemena (No. 112. 1-3. col. . col. col. 29. Ill. I.. 3 and 4 . 19. 115. col. 37 if not all. 147. No. 87. I. II. col. shall abslain from giving the exact passages. I. IS'o. I. I.. 87. Sarzec. 3. PI.^ ban. JI. col. 46. 2 (mti). I. Ill. PI. Enanatuma I. (\ (/. II. thus attached to two sep(Jen). col. 0. in fact for those I do not write. PI. Edingiranagin. b. 3G-i7 (No. 88. 5). 1. Deeouvertrs. Edingiranagin. Edingiranagin. Endigiranagin . same time. 1 f e. 2. gish. II. 8 f e. etc. No. 5. 4) . 104. 106.: . c . V. ' 87. col. left. Xo. texts of . Entemena (cf. 10. it 'Except of course his barrel cylinder. 9. No. 10. 5) ta. 20. No. the sign used by Ur. Frag..'' Ur-Nina and Edino. 10. Entemena. col. 130. I. 6. etc. 5. I do not intend to give introductory lessons in has number disposal. 4. col. 'Also used by NaramSin. 3. The script is almost entirely linear like that of Urukagina. 87. lOG. 6. 2. also the present work. 87. If. col. Enanatuma I (. I. Cf 110. col. 31. Enanatuma II. No. Ui--Nina. PI. II. a (ID). 87. 9. No. No. Urukagina I. etc ). passim. 102. e. 36 (mv). c . I shall prove my theory in detail by the following arguments Pateographically they exhibit most important points of contact with Uruka- gina. col. Edingiranagin. 3. 2) with the same sign in the te. No. to the right or arating lines at the {lo). as * was inscribed with a (De Sarzec. with the same sign used by Urukagina. No. col. 3. A. Entemena. No.). 84. 5 {ma). II. 87. 12 9 (shu). 80. col. I. CHIEFLY PROM NIPPUR. 3. 96. 3. II. ma. 40 ff. c. 87. 37. col. cf. No. as a rule. Rctue d'AsI syriologie II. below. shu. col. . Edingiranagin (De Sarzec. col. 86. Edingiranagin. col. IV. Ur-Nina (De IV. 2. of the other inscriptions published on Pis. cf No. 4 f.Revue . col. 12. especially with the rt. 112). I. which has cuneiform characters. which so far have been observed only in the most ancient texts of Tello: (1) Lines of linear signs running parallel to a separating line (marking columns and other divisions) frequently fall together line with this latter so that the character above.Nina.' two as I or more characters who ancient inscriptions the limited In Uicse quotations. Edingiranagin da. 1-4. 10. II. I.Kts of Edingiranagin a. II. For this pahieographic peculiarity in the inscriptions of Tello. and many other characters. 4. III. 17 difi'erent 29 (/^). 7. 41 (Var. 5. col. now appears attached to the separating ai"e Sometimes characters 87. p. They show certain peculiarities in the script. 1. . with the same sign in the Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin . stylus. with the same sign used by Urukagina. 7. Characteristic signs are identical in these I^ippur and Tello inscriptions.. II. No. col. 2. same age doubtless belong most. 34 (and Yar ) with Uruwith kagina. 4.. expect that everybody examines my arguments my of Telle before. col.lranao:in. 33. 115. 3. 37 (cf No. II. col. 18. Ill. 2. No. No. 3.' ma. Enanatuma I. col. etc. 4. Entemena. and to of pages here at made himself familiar with the paheography and contents of the most those who have not done so. col. and many others written on (2) In accordance with this principle I fragments of No. No. 4 110. 87. 7. col. first three mentioned.). Ill. col. col. 2.. No. with the same sign used by Urukagina. Ur-Nina. 2. col. 8 (Var. 5. p. Cf No. I. with the sign used by Ur-Nina.

1). . p. 20 Var. 99. . No. No. 43. col. PI. Samerische Leustucke. II. As. the god Shul pa-nd du. cf. 2"'. 34 (ki-ag). Scheil in Recueil It XV. 180. Ill. II. ^.). Cf. 4 and 5 . 21. "the shepherd having the head of an ox" = "the ox- hcaded shepherd. Ill. 19 (AaZam-ma). Ilommel. Jensen. Babylonia and low(mi'itu) in lands are equivalent ideas. p.. I. 3t. 8 (lah-ba. Nina- shu-banda. p. 176 (Elilprecht. (ma-na). g. 5. Obel. »Cf. 2-5. follows that the name it does not signify " low-lands " or " Tiefebene " in general in the ancient inscriptions. No. Tableau Compare. The same p. On the value oi dug cf. col.5. From this correct etymology of Eengi and 90. col. 7 ( Shul-pa) No. l<:iianatiiiiia II (De Sarzec.. Kusmologie. e (canal) + gi (reed) and originally denotes a excellence piece of land intersected by canals and covered with reeds No. II. p. 5 Var. c.* The best illustration is afforded by the writing of the name of his son. Betve d'Assyrivlogie »Cf. 63 . ganam-yad-shakir-a dim.) .. Assyriaca. No. identical with Biiinnow. 8(5. 3 ff . Part PI. Sumeriaehe Lesesiueke. Off). go. 43. 6. col. Salm. ki nin Unugki ga. according to Jensen. example of a regular monogram in the history of writing (De Sarnumber of signs which occurred always" in the same c. 93. which remained unidentified Schrader's 376) is such a long time note 4 .' col. 1-5). 'Cf. A d' Assyriologie III. 1 1. 1. 2. 34 1 (PA (?) [first . col. 4 f. read nb {I'A-LU sng-guda-gal. etc. I. 5. 147. No. col. 148. Oppert read Uun-pa-e. Jensen in p. 62 f. 40. kigalla) ishpu-uk. 5. No. 43. 14.50. PI. I. ina. II. however. I. 87. Hi. gi-c/i). col. has in the ancient inscriptions the two values and ma (for the latter cf . . 39). the earliest zec. 31. read NA-GA = isAAiu^ life. No 3. II. 12). Nos. note). 15-18." col. col. 14 f. 1. Ill. 1. e. 87. 39 (i7r!/m*-» ma) ). lietue d'Asnyriologie If.. e. XV. 3000 years later. 87. nam ti. K D. No. and the present work. 3) it it* use in the earliest texts bar Eengi.' 21 (ha-dag). IT. «"The No. Babylonia proper. col. 4. Jastrow bad not seen a Tello insciiption when he wrote his remark in Z. 1-5. 9. No. Ill. 4. 15 . 13. 6 and 7. 95. The land par with these two characteristic features was Babylonians their own country. 'No. etc. 87." an ideogram of Bau or Gula (Briinnow. col 1-6. 2 (da-da) cf. Ill It. note 11 (_Umunpauddu). 123. No. IU. p. A. 6." a synonym of king.5. 87. {Nin-dia-dug ) No. Eilteiiicna (De Sarzec. pp 136 f. Nos. cf.). G (nada). 20. col. Ill.. (da- gd). I. ^Col. 9 1.5. inapa. forming so-called ligatures. c. for 4t. 1. col. I. is V. is mentioned No. PI. 115.' On the monuments of Tello this tendency to unite two characters into one is almost entirely confined to the inscriptions of UrNina. 1. PI.. p. part I.Ulli.38 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS standing in close proximity to each other frequently enter into a combination. 33. 16. Eengi could also be used in a wider sense for " low-lands " general. II. The to the linear sign composed of (cf. IU. 43. Lint 11034. LM 5410. col. VIII. which therefore was called by the oldest inhabitants Ei + e + gi — Eengi. ^a-6a-(io£?-yj— "unto my life he may add 'PA 'On gal LU sag gud. No. cf also Variants). and Eiigh<ig>agnna en Eengi. against Scheil iu Recueil On P1. 9 (ma-shu).. 6.^ Cf. 45 (da-gi. 115-117. etc.. 29-31 -. No. 217. B. Appirjatly Dr. p. p. and in Schrader's E.) For oUier examples of Entemena's text io Uie present work. but that the geographical designation of a well-deflned district. which alone have to decide its nuaning (against Winckler is in Milteilungen des Akademisch. Amiaud et Mecliineau. No. in the inscription of Tiglathpileser I (I 11. 7 f. cf. of the character sib] '-gal) . No. IV. 19. sUg mu-da-gi-gi. The last character in 1. No. II. 41. p.' half 98.b'lr " the land of canals and reeds. 'In a limited measure the same peculiarity occurs in several Assyrian inscriptions. 37. (cf. part 1. PI. I." (and col. 106. and p No. Ilommel. 2. 3. 4.. Var. (M-gub) . 38. Ill.Orientalistischen Vereina za Berlin. Ill. namti-mu. 1887. goddess who destroys life. c. 21. The four signs which compose the name are contracted into one large sign. 67. (. 2 {dam-dumu). KI-GAL (= 'Col. Var. deity 55.

kur Ni-tagki. For they would have been too small of and weak for such a puipose. 854. lines 6 where the two respective as gan (kan) finding the name of Magan gal.. and ters Utnu d' As^riologie II. Ilommel (^Sumerische Lesetivcke.. Jensen (in Schrader's K." . For examples V. each of which possesses (in I. 7. and No. "a "to 7. The gift of the priest of Ningirsu he brought from . pait note 6). built the his chief butler temple of Nina. the present work. and is and \iagc {Un-nita " at his side "=" page. No. these tablets generally illustrate and describe person and work of the donor in relation to his is Ur Nina's more elaborate votive tablets (of which the smaller only an exceipt. col. Lesest No. which Jensen untranslated) answered by leferring him to the Gudea passage just translated.Q. and 10. gu gishmu na galla-aan. (a/t) mamhru-a Z^. col. Bibl Arch. Dilmun. No and others. This picture illustrates tlie and {Sag antug ' he is words standing below the cup. divers engins consaciei aux dieu. 113 . p. .v et parlic ilieremeiit des masses d'armes volives " (Heuzey. But while such donations were consumed in the interest etc. 6. snnga (Briinuow. githdin (nie 13. seated and surrounded by his children the chief"). up"). <>n possibly on the altar itself tiie and inscriptions dcit}'. 11. however (in (in Becord» of the Fasti III. 76 a p. p. . sur des autels ou sur dcs massifs de hriques. Nos. p. king of Shirpurla. lag. in the wall or floor of the temple. Sarzec. even if the sign 'The peculiar way (fftV/j not directly connected with this latter. = kaah + din). Miiganki. Btriie d' Asfyriologie II. accordingly represent two sides of the king's In the upper section he has the dupshig in the present work undertaken surrounded by the service of his god. 2bis) which remained obscure to (cf. mu-na-taud-dti. Tcalama " country. The passage mu-tum (?)— "a ship (laden) with wine he brought from the ccmnlry which posses. Lay (DU-DU dinr/ir = a&a/u "to bring. were regularly contracted at this early time and became compound ideograms. t<hirpur-la''-i-shu. 3-0. XVI. 'I'no-r : 1. kura-ta. Amiaud may have read is Meluha. II." note 13).). upon his head (exactly as Nabopolatser describes himself his children work. PI. 1893)." etc. We are now I'l. gishdin zu-zu-n. every kind of B. 8. These bas-reliefs and incised slabs the present work." not (cf." perforated has relief (De Sarzec. ship of wine he brought from the country which possesses every kind of tree. 3.). 87. Z. I. 39 combination and served to express but one idea or object. 13. g. 16. Ouliln. characas well as Oppert (in p." In the lower secliim the same king. together with De Saizec. p.. GAG .. PI. in cf. 147) and Heuzey Benue d' Assyriologie p. E-ninhura. in Let Armoirits Chalde. tree. Ill. A. VIII. c... enabled to understand the full significance of Ur-Nina's c. 13. Nov. (^ dupshikhu). built the temple of Ningirsu. 6 f. p. Ilommel." The inscription of the bas-relief published set by Heuzey 2. De Sarzec. col.e. 2. note 1). I. 3 10. 3. 9.) or decayed in time (buildings) or died (slaves). V. note ft). No. 7. pp.3) 'Ungi-r Nin gir-su-ka ye. (cf. in Ur-Nina's inscriplion (De Sarzec. Sec. p. 4. 1-3. PI. Gubi. No. "in his hand. PI. reads rather : 1. -[- 30." gisMin^ " wine. ma gishdin. Cf. !). objects by the aid of a nail. or Gudea D (De 11. pp. (cf. 6. cf. NingirSM. in wliich it is written in the oldest inscriptions of Tello. col. c. must therefore be abandoned. aud Decoueertea en Chaldee. 191 f. Heuzey in his treatise mentioned below. No.— CHIEPLT FROM KIPPUJl. 2Ws. masons. The 180) analysis of this ideogram by Pinches {Sign List. 57 ft". p. : cf. 9): 6. e. 16. 147." : 0\^xiexl\n Rtvue d' Assyr- iologie III. 1. B. No. I. it. Les Armovies Chnldeennes de Sirpourla. the symbol of 33. (3) Lines of linear signs which run parallel to a separating line are is often omitted. I. The hole the middle of the tablets served to fasten (3) Tlie scenes. as to what left Jensen's qiieslicn Sclirader's III. pp. GISH (not gisal. This picture illustrates the accompanying statement " Ur-Nina. J c . col to IV. nnesde Sirpouila readu 3.. PI. col. IV. mu m-iu/n— "Magan. I. son of Ill. Ililprecht. . 170) standing immediately before the king).ses every kind of tree. Aingir su-ka. accepted by Delitzsch (Ati>yriiic/if8 nnuluorUrbvch. built the abzu banda Jensen in K. and worked into a . 37 f.j) ura-sha. sanga 10. The true facts are rather these (1) They accompanied donations of the temple service any kind made to the temple. Nigalnigin. Sum. Edingiranagin's inscription un- earthed in London (/Voc. List 5QS0) may. B. 168-17M). Amiaud. i/elvy-ya'-i. 4.5i. 8 9.) did not servo "a maintcnir dresses. part 1. leaves no doubt as to its composition -f dii. 11 : f.). offers a libation of wine. 3. p. 2Ws. *' ta.. 30. part 1. 1 (lower section. wrongly read ginh din (notwithstanding the passage from Gudea characters are very diffcrenl from each other !) just quoted. gu gith in the first line. PI. 1." nazaiu 5. 13. brought a ship (laden) with timber aud wine to Shirpurla. 27.. to their munificent in these tablets were preserved in the temple as lasting memorials (2) donors and served at the same time to induce other worshipers to similar acts of piety. mu na yim—" Gift of the high priest of Ningirsu to it Ningirsu of the temple Euini.

" denotes a person as the second child of the same family. and others did). 19 Var. ]I. c. and must be regarded be treated following fact. (li). a reed. : first sign. 2). col. JI. col. I." The sign for s7iesh. 4 ( Unug). water poured out. PI. rnwiia (tic!) . othei's as characteiistic features of an earlier stage of writing. No." ra {ne. Ill. Tlie cuneiform sign without for assistance . liis denotes him who is at somebody's side he who has the same marks of tattooing upon arm. even 87. 40 Yar. 5 Var. "brother.- I confine myself here to a brief statement of the A number of signs have a form representing almost least a the original pic- have at more original form than the iuscriptions from Tello. But besides they exhibit a number of palaeoda). No. 23." in lietue d'Assyriologie these maiks III. while the loriner expresses tiibal relations represented by a common symbol. 9). this sign must not be turned to the Hough- ton. 87. col. Impossible I It repreeents the skin of or better a coarse iiig spread it upon the ground in for peisous of rank (and images tlie of deities) to ill til upon . (na) No. 'Jlte MoitumtnU of J\ineteh. c. 1). 17. (da). For it is a law in cuneiform writing "that the characters are and always I. 37 : la-i\\ {sic!). show all the characteristic features of the inscriptions of Urukagina. 2 ''". Ill. col. p. e. p. 87. No. 37 Var.. I. (wanO. gi (ibid. PI. "Rapport sur les tatouages Tunisiens. g. etc. 33-41). The way in written in the name of UiuIiagina*(Du Sarztc. yet wiiliout toucliing each other. 8) an altar. III. Ct. almost confined' to the inscriptions of Ur2. 45. 473. to 'According Oppert {Ixpedition en Mhopotaruie. Second PI. col. those of Urukagina not excepted. col. 3. the ear of a corn." bar coarse rug).. p. (kalama) col. a tattooed forearm with hand). (ra). col. p. Cf. For details on this subject I rtier to my GencMchte und Syalem der KeiUchrift. ' In advance I warn Assyriologists not to regard a fourth palicographic peculiarity (so far confined to these Nippur : texts) as a mistake of the scribes (4) If two linear signs wliich are to be connected grammatically stand close together in writing. cf. 32. therefore. 31 Yar. 37 Yar. g. its The triangle on the of our picture does not represent the lower end of the stem of a reed. exact harmony with p. upper section (da in the name of Ab- Ur in the name of Ur-Nina). this peciiliaritj is I. 4 Var. c. 14 and 20 Var. 04) and Bertin ((. 3 : mana. 98. {dingir). is lound in a text of Entemena IV. reversed in the same way lelt . Lelinjann {SliainaihishnmnKin. 21. (a). pp. 87 and the other texts referred to above.. the corresponding pictures Series. with them. "to wash"). means 'side " {da) . frequently one line ol the second running parallel to a line in the first is omitted entirely and has to be supplemented from the 40 Var. Berger. Out- Nippur texts e. I.. 103. bulrash)\ a (ibid. col. They will in full at another place. p. Nina. I. 3 Yar. also 1.40 OLD BABTLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS . Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin. 29 (ma). lievve d' Assyriologie II. .. 86.^ lah (ibid. 12. p. Cf. 1. sum (No. I. ( De Sarzec. 6). c. The pala^ographic evidence brought forth is conclusive. Y. cf. 4 (the skin of an animal or) a (ibid. 1 (reproduced by Aluspero in The Dawn oj Uitilizalion. 21. graphic peculiarities whicli are altogether absent from the inscriptions of Tello. 34 Var. left (as all In order to obtain a clear conception of the original picture. col. 501). Cf. therefore has become his "brother. denotes the place of honor. col. {sic!). 41 Yar. No. which has been prepa- ration for the last nine years. ibid. 45). 39 : ugawi ' (tic!). what (originally) was the right Iiand side became (later) the top" (Berlin. 2 (wm). c. 'One example which Ur is (ibid. 31 in egi-a. ture. In other words. but marks of tattooing (cf. 122) is therefore correct in giving . c.. in col. 4. 1. Revus d'Assyriologie II. 86. an anin al Tome II.. . I.. No. I. ou the Assjiian monuments publislied in Layard. p. Nos. 149.. 147. II. fuinislies llie key to tlie origin of this peculiariiy. but rather top or Cob. {gim) side of the col. II. *The crossed lines do not represent "an oinamented sleeve" it (Bertin. custom prevailing the tents of Arabia and Mesopotamia to day. p.

8oc. 455). six had the same ideogram. "ocean.. the Nippur texts have a large number of far more original forms of signs than the Urukagina and Ur-Nina inscrijjtions published.'' Kish :N'o 102. I same sign on the very ancient monument preceding Urukagina's time (De Sarzec. 49. as in the corresponding Egyptian hiero- the latter rests. 1-3. col. PI." Za-ab denotes "the house (abode) into which later it the waters flow. c. p. lu The two elements + gal appear separated in arm reached No. figur. Originally zu and therefore.." instead of "cliamber. and consequently some very were (second variant). I. as shown above.. e. but represents the cushion between the head and the vessel upon which Originally the further to the rim of the vessel. I. also the 1). ideogram zng 3 . sents a vessel (cistern?) into which water flows. to "to flow into.. No. 6 (Trans. 7 line . and others. a very curious form. * It closely approaches the original picture explained by a Babylonian scribe on the famous fr. difiiculties 44 (fourth variant) ganam. 37. No. 45 shig. « g. " canal " + " to fill = horn). I. Nobody can object that a few cliaracters in these Nippur inscriptions seem to show the beginning of wedgeall writing and that a few others seem to liave a later form. from Kuyunjik.." then all (?). 7. IV. the sign shows the remnant of the original arm.k{k)aUu denotes the servant {gal) similar who pours out (su) [namely water over his master's hands and feet]. Houghton. 6." may be translated "chamberlain" (Kiimmerer). 38.. col. XV. I.. VI. I. c. Ill. * Cf. (ihid. Bibl. to "to increase one's linowledge.). p. received a more general meaning. Cf. But tlie exact analysis of the compound "ra. col. 105. apparently bearing tlie same long inscription here publislied. A word with meaning cf. 83. 475) we excavated in Nuffar. 83.^ Cf. 15 Var. 3. XVII. and others. 92. 2 Var. the other hand.).** In view of these facts I can only draw one conclusion are older than those of Urukagina. 40d.. . Lugalziggisi presented c. 103 large inscribed vases. II.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR.'' All the stone as the Urukagina have the regular Old Babylonian sign mu^ jnst Nippur texts here treated. dug-a 29 (second variant) da. l^is b.. col.' and many for others for whose explanation I must refer to inscriptions of my On Geschichte und System der Keilschrift. Soe.^ lugal (ibid. which I discovered long before 8oc. to learn. 39 (variants) aga. (sic!). Sukkallu know. is. col in. 4i gur. Several of tliem understood but Cf. 11 and 14). 42 Var. no continuation of the forearm. . which is but a mutilated 37. ' p." ' ideogram. 64). produced. little Every stonecutter available was ridiculous forms employed.. Recueil tobara^g) the original meaning. Bibl. 16 of writing." which Hommel translated half correctly "house of water add. some years may form for still pass before its publication. etc. 101. 'Only ' his barrel cylinder in clay exhibits traces of the older mu. XVI.. 13 Var. . to Inlil of Nippur. ^. Zu means. " to irri- gate"). Sayce {Transaclions of in col. (zw) is apparently contained in zu-ah. "seat. Arch. p. In order to understand the enormous bear tliis which I liad to over- come in restoring this text. Bibl. of the present work. gur (ibid. Arch. VI. * As have to dispose of more urgent matters at present. Ill. Arch. The which continues beyond the head however. also the (]S"o. fact corroborates —that most of these Nippur texts III. 'Oppert already recognized the general significance of the picture (I. second Var. glyphics and as illustrated by PI. 41 " (si 37 Yar. 3 103. p. No." Nuffar (in a Tliis sign much more developed form) and was identified with bar by Scheil independently of me. which repretrans.. Another important my determination of the age of these occurs frequently in the contracts of Cf. col. col. 'Successfully analyzed by Ball in Proc. Assyriologisls will fact in mind. col. 4)." Siirnerische Lesestueke. 8u." or "to pour into. No. remained obscure to him.^ ag (l^o.

The two documents. 4 No. I. 87. 5. col. if is not the whole. had succeeded in invading and conquering a lai'ge portion. col. PI. 10) had conquered all Babylonia and established an empire extending from the Persian Gulf fore not inferior to that to the Mediterranean Sea. 3. the traces preserved on two fragments establish my text restoration of this line beyond doubt. No. generally transliterated as plays a very is important role. 4. 31. This first " king of the world" (lugal Tcalama. as Brought into tlie 'In view of De Sarzec. 3. I. PI. 8. 13. the Babylonian history. c. god " (by his parents after his birth). Babylonia the one prominent feature which characterizes his government. so much certain that at some time previous to Edingiranagin. Ill. A. Shirpurla it not mentioned in Lugalzaggisi's inscription. was doubtless set his great victory ovei* "'"'BAI^*'. and to which (in connection with Ereeh. in size thereI. I. the other illustiating its must is therefore antedate the monument of Edingiranagin. Sarzec. the one giving a resume of the rise and height of the power and influence of ""'BAN*'. 2. The former As doubtless some time downfall. A. Ill. PI. of Babylonia. Apparently y'sABAN^' played a second important . and p. col. 4. and in this De c. 4) of whom Babylonian documents give us information. From the character used for " king" I draw the conclusion (with ible in Ileuzey) that the object belongs to a somcwliat later period. elapsed between the rise and downfall of this foreign power as. 36-41.9. . col. We learn at the same time from this very important histoiical document that Lugalzaggisi. 49-84. col. I. This was the original reading of 10. and finally as palajographically this inscription from Nippur shows more traces of oi-iginality than the texts of 31. and the stele of vultures from Tello. Is illustrated on monument belong * to the city (and country) of si'hQk'^kl (De Sarzec. belong closely together and supplement each other. col. 5. The most intei'esting object yet the so-called stele of vultures. 18J). pp.^ Is-ban'''. c. V. In fact the annihilation of the power of this city in S. Nippur. . and by his great achievements raised '"'''BAN''. included. I agrie with this scholar that the people whose defeat I. was found in No. pp. c. Urukagiua and Ur-Nina. his native city. II.42 insci'lptions OLD BABYLONIAN INSCHIPTIONS very strongly. B. •The fragment Tello (De Sarzec. 2. 4. apparently because did not as yet exercise any political influence ^ . II. col. I. 3. The same it city of ""''BAN" and here again occurs in connection with Erech and Ur (and Larsam). 11 : Fragm. PI. »Cf. In the inscriptions of Edingiranagin. "to great power" 87. c. col. founded much later by Sargon I. 1."^ up by foreign this sovereign in commemoration of is How- ever this may be. 3. moreover. 174-184. a power whose centre was "'''BAN*'. III.). i<» Origines OrientaUs. Ill. Ei-ech and also mentioned in the long [Nippur text Ur No. 'For col. col. details Ileuzey's explanation of the figurative representations in his work. 119). son of a certain Ukush "patesi of """BAN*"" (col. apparently dedicated by a king of ff'^'iBAN'^' to Ningirsu. I. I. 3." in Tello. Fragm. [a mag mu-um-yxir. No. pp. cf. 5. of an inscribed object. Fragm. 41f. the grandson of Ur-Isina. or Edingiranatum. II. PI. selected Erech as his capital. Ur and some found other cities) the king refers again and again. a city. 5 (&'fZtnjft>a-«(i<um-ma= " house of his De Sarzi-c. col. 6.

11. Contributions to the Uistory of Sargon land und His Predecessors. p. fur Keilschriflforschung IF. pp. Q. ' Les Origines OrientaUs.' Pieces of inscribed objects unearthed below the Sargon level prove posi- tively that writing existed in Nippur long before Sargon It seems. written records of the ancient Babylonian civili- Everybody who has studied the earliest inscriptions of Babylonia from their paLcography. on the other side p. stated above. 43 we are justified in placing Lngalzaggisi before these ISTos. •Published by Houghton in Trans. AUorientalische Fonchungen III. Oeschichte. antedating the kingdom of Sargon I by original picture in is testified This pre-Sargonic period must have had a system of writing for the earliest texts at our disposal. 605. at the very outset. impossible to believe that not one document antedating the highly devel- oped style of writing or Tello. 236 ff. 50. p. p. ' * In lUcueil XV. pp. 454. 54. pp. 35. ' Called so for the sake of brevity. Oeschichte Bahyloniens Assyriens. 19). p. lowest strata of us that Babylonian civilization had a history several thousand years. . 84 . 291." Heuzey " and myself (Part I. 65f.' with more or I will less emphasis placed Sargon I and his son after Ur-Kina and Edingiranagin now briefly give the definite proof of 1. before the Oriental Club of Philadelphia]. Recently adopted by Rogers. 43 !) . CHIEFLY TKOM NirPUR. Revue d' Assyriulogie III. . g. Cf above. 1S93. 2. according to our present knowledge. Leipzig. pp. pp. two rulers of Shir- purla and in regarding most of the inscriptions published as 86-112 as older than the earliest rojal inscriptions from Tello/ At any rate. and has devoted that special pains to all the details of 'The liule fragment No. A which question of fundamental importance for our correct conception of the earliest last ten years : phase of Babylonian history has been repeatedly discussed within the relation did In Sargon I (and Naram-Sin) stand to the early kings of Tello? ? ' Did he antedate or succeed them in favor of the Winckler and Maspero expressed themselves decidedly ' former view. •Cf. also Recent Research in Bible Lands. p. it would be altogether unreasonable to regard the inscriptions of first Sargon and Narum-Sin as the zation. The Dawn of Civilization. 57. 107 cannot be referred to the lime of Entemena. p. p. the famous fragments from Kuyunjik. Ekur will have convinced. 43 . ^ Ontermchungen.. Inlil. however closely approaching the such as " Blau " ^ and number of cases. The results of the exploration of the the validity of our theory. the only other ruler of Tello who.^ while Hommel. Bibl. 40f. t/ie p.. Arch. and reproduced in several other works. to have existed in Babylonia by the monument by I. presented an inscribed vase to the rising of Sbirpurla in the South and of the extending of its Perhaps it is the first indication of sphere of influence northward at the expense of ff'sABANW. note 4. Cf. presuppose an earlier stage of writing. in Sargon's monuments should have been excavated in Nuffar In fact. (but cf.. note 3 (end). Outlines of after hearing Uistory of Early Babylonia. pp. 182 . therefore. 66f. Zeitschrift «.. which originals. Soc. they are not later than these. note 1 [but given up again ' my address.

the diameter at the top being larger than that at the bottom.C. at the top. Ur-Gur. The size of the above-mentioned vase is : h. 18 . is that he can- not have lived later than 4500 B. that if Ileuzey's judgment of the age of these specimens of galzaggisi. at the bottom. IS^o. basis of other arguments. 50)." L(» Origines Orientales. to use it p. In general this class of vases resembles a flower-pot. It is surely remarkable that Monsieur Heuzey and myself. In conneclineaire tion with his discussion of the age of the stele of vultures he makes the emphatic statemenl. also the monuments of Lu- Naram-Sin. are surely older than Edingiranagin. every Assyriologist are. and Sargon and Naram-Sin. PI. below the pavement of Naram-Sin.. It is out of regard for the view of those who do not accept Nabonidos' 3200 years as correct. which must be regarded as the strongest evidence in favor of the French scholar's determination. "le type (cf. artists at Since a specimen of the workmanship of the (cf. is enabled to judge for himself as to the value of Ileuzey's judgment.as most of the vases which bear Lugalzaggisi's inscription. de r^criture est assurement plus ancien que celui des inscriptions de Naram-Sin.54 m. 4. must lies come to the conclusion that a much longer period of development be- tween Lugalzaggisi. a&hes. 3. however. on the one hand. a few fragments of a discovered in Nippur. It consists He found covered with earth and black of white calcite stalagmite and has a very characteristic shape never found at a later period Nippur again. 26. from Nipjnir grouped together with them. Heuzey. inscrijitions of Lugalzaggisi and of the other kings. on the reliefs had inferred that the stele of vultures it and the of Ur- Nina are "surely older than Naram-Sin. d. etc. 43. 14. expressing the hope that I might be able it in support of my in theory as to the age of most of the other ancient vase fragments from Nippur..8 cm. have reached exactly the same conclusions.. etc. It is needless to quote passages from Mr. August 10. Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin. antedate art is correct. that the etc. who have devoted years of constant study to the palaography of the earliest original inscriptions of Babylonia. It was found 1. than between the latter ' and Ur-Ba'u Gudea.44 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCKIPTIONS I have a right to expect from those necessarily who criticise my statements on this subject. on the other.C." Hence would follow. From pateographic and other reasons. relief in clay lately however. Urukagina. 1895. While Heuzey declared LTr-Nina's and Edingiranagin's ' reliefs to be of greater antip. . 64). I came to the conclusion above. Nartm-Sin's time was recently discovered XXH. etc. while the walls frequently recede a little at the middle. showing There exactly the same high degree of execution as the script on his monuments. and must therefore considerably antedate the rule of the latter.8 . My own personal conviction. quite Independently of each other.5 . at the middle. 13. patesis. I am now in the position to prove the correct- ness of Ileuzey's view beyond question. ^Haynes reported on lliis vase. Ileuzey's works in aildition to those given on note 6. 1 hat my determination of the age of Lugalzaggisi is not too high is proved by the discovery of an uninscribed vase of precisely the same material and characteristic shape. that on paheographic evidence alone I assign to Lugalzaggisi the minimal date of 4000 B.

forworship. un monument des plus precieux. bricks. G. 1). In his report of Oct. tile of very great anti- The drainage from this floor was conducted into a large vertical drain. 1895. 1. in Bagdad). 45 quity than Narani-Sin's monuments. p. 34 (two drawings from the hand of the late Mr. of the lowest trace of Babylonian civilization. que nous devons placer avec respect tout a fait en tete des series orientales. De Sarzec. bear the legend of show Ur-Nina. as " plus primitif. below penetration of the level of Naram-Sin's pavement. bricks of the ancient cuib around the allar.70 m. piano convex cf. 26. No. f The peculiar shape of these bricks in llie arch is scarcely distinguishable on PI. I read self In Part PI. c. of the present work. istic feature The form of these baked must therefore be regarded as a character- of all structures previous to the time of Sargon I and Naram-Sin. AVe draw a I. note They will be published in Series B of the expedition work by myself. 14.. ISTo. the founder of the Cassite dynasty. I twice called attention to the fact that baked bricks found below Naram-Sin's pavement are plano-convex in form. PI. and Ihe bricks of the ancient arch. It is quite in accordance with this view that the only inscribed bricks of Tello which this peculiar form. long and has an with average diameter of 85 cm. in form. whom on other evidence I placed before Sargon and Naram-Sin. Gande (pp. XXV III . which is 2 m. marks on the convex side.CHIEFLY TROM NIPPUR. above. I. comme le plus ancien example his subject to. In connection with my examination of the pre-Sargonic strata of Ekur." These words of a true master of reliefs have found a splendid confirmation in the clay in their of Nippur just referred which whole conception and execution show a striking resemblance to the oldest speart recovered cimen of from Tello. I. and as "une ceuvre le d'une antiquite prodigieuse. I published three brief legends of a king whom. and that these biicks as a rule bear a simple thumb mark upon their convex side. p. 28 ff". 24.' Truly the genius and critical Heuzey could not have won a more 5." For a specimen of Ur-Nina's bricks 20 Dec. connu de la sculpture chaldeenne. They were found 7-7. 26. in favor of this 2. when edited 'Cf.far I might have added that no other form of baked brick has so been discovered anywhere in the lowest strata of Nippur. celui de la du roi Our-ISIina" [De Sarzec.e. 1. All that I I wrote those brought forward identity 1 herewith withdraw . No. and whom I regarded as identical with Gandash. grossiere tablette meme que 2]. 23-25. 'The Sin. until the contrary has been proved.). p. he characterized the relief which opens the splendid series of De Sarzec's finds (PI. final and conclusive argument from a door-socket of Sargon himNos. and within about 1. as practiced by Moslems [in the immediate neighborhood of their mosques]. Mayer." finger This tile drain is "supported by a double course of bricks. I. 1894. 31. Haynes it refers to the discovery of a terra -cotta floor with a rim a little below the pavement of Naram- He regards as a combination of bath and closet. p. influenced by Pinches's reading (Garde). Specimens of this class of Nippur bricks were given by Peters in The American Archmological Journal X. and has several points of contact with the art exhibited in the stele of vultures. brilliant victory. "proving that the present customs and methods of preparing is the body quity. 26.50 m. PI.

"Table of Contents. had originally 8 according to the traces On the diorite blocks these inscriptions are well preserved. dred years before. and other blocks- to the temple as raw material is for future use the time of Bur-Sin II several of these blocks. calcite. 86. oflFthis old completely shaken theory as utterly untenable when contrasted with the known was facts of Babylonian palaeography. PI. presented (this" z=?ie)). 12 ff. 29. 14-20. on the whole question of presenting stones as raw material to the temple. According to Part 29.'' the same rude inscription is scratched upon the back side of a door-socket of Sargon just treated it I. The curses on the statue 'Cf. The observation. however.' this sovereign presented a number of unhewn diorite. 2. cf. such as vases.j) in remembrance of the gift. 47.." p.46 pages. that the chai-acters represent the peculiarities of Ur-Kina's inscriptions vated. 39. of which one published on PI. »Cf. 59 ff. XI. From the analogous case follows that all Lugal kigub-nidudu must have other inscriptions which have the lived even befoi-e Sargon I. In the latter case the lapis lazuli was likewise pre- sented as raw material to be used the interest of the temple. XVII. left. to the the few words of its donor respectfully on tni-ned it it into a door-socket. Part p. 24. *Cf. I arrived at once at the result that the three legends published on PI. Cf. stalagmite etc. pp. p. PI. ' were still unused. 2. on Ihe door-sockets of Sargon. king of Ur. B in of Gudea. No. . 14 were wiitten by Lugalkigub-nidudu. No. But the inscription— this was the intention of the off. whose surface corroded and crumbled in the course of six millenniums. pp. which I made on p. 190 S. XVIir. But something similar happened many hunI. in Z. section 1. The inscription on the block. At XVII. Parti. Among other gifts. on the calcite blocks however. col. Inlil L. Bur-Sin II selected a its side. PI. PI. Hilprecht As shown above. they have suffered considerably. note 2. I. somewhat influenced by the current view of Assyriologists. 29. donor— was to be preserved (a thin piece of lapis lazuli being cut PI. antiquity and scrupu- lously preserved for diorite block 1500-2000 years in the temple left archive. number of vase fragments have been excaby which I was enabled to confii-m and strengthen my previous judgment based upon the study of a few squeezes of badly effaced inscriptions and to analyze the palentirely correct.' They had been handed down from a hoary c. 40-48. Since then a large seogi-aphic peculiarities of this whole class of ancient texts completely. VIII. on the lapis lazuli block of Kadashman-Turgu. dishes. VII. PI.^ from among them. * Cf. I was later still OLD BABYLOXIASr INSCRIPTIONS. 'These blocks received therefore only a kind of registering mark scratched merely upon lil(la) Lugal-ki-gub ni their surface [Dinglr En- dudu (n«) amuna-nhub. and consequently that arities as his ' same palatograph ic peculi- own can only be classified as pre-Sargonic. 13 ff. " lord of Erech. wrote his in this sented new form own inscription on its polished surface and pretemple. that Since then I have all kings occasionally imitated older patterns in their script. A." who left us No. "To li.... 1.

however. 37 "represent very characteristically two species. . lord of Kengi.. corrobplate.ad Gapra mgagrus). 87. and the lines are too vertical " (communication from my colleague. the nakedness of the fact that his figure and the other two have hair shaved off. The goat shows more characteristics of the wild species of Eastern Persia (i. Here we have DA. aside from other considerations. is known to be a Semiticism for daru. It perhaps the urial ' Oois vignei. who kindly examined the monument). Ills inscriptions (Nos. 'Cf. * the king of heaven. this stele and No. but rugosity of the horns too great. the short Ur-Eiilil. the great he exhibits ! in his drawing of the graceful outlines of a in gazel. It is therefore impossible to say whether he belonged to the Sumei-ian or Semitic race.'' from the fact that the human figures on the stele of Ur-Enlil. or traced his origin to both." 87. and his remarkable knowledge of animal locomoone a goat and the far tion The two animals No. col. in the Transactions of the latter society. 38 of the same which doubtless belongs with a few simple skill lines. ' 21) and above p. HE. 33."- the earliest period of history which inscriptions reveal to us. my determination of the age of this monument. garment of the two persons following the sheep tiieir and orate goat. Asuyrisclies Uandworterbuch.'" city " Whether he its was of foreign origin or the shaykh of a smaller Babylonian " which extended influence or the regular descendant of the royal family of one of the larger cities. which will be found in other places. note 9. 4 (also No. and Afghanistan than of the Per- and so may be a domestic hybrid between the two is Caprafalconerii a. p. Edward D. In the briefest possible way I will indicate the general results which I di'aw from a combined study of the most ancient Kippur and Tello inscriptions. Babylonia has a is high civilization and known under is '' the name of Kengi. which I shall make. in show the characteristic tlie Z. where expect to give a more complete sketch of the political and social conditions of ancient Babylonia. "land of the canals and which includes South and Middle Babylonia and possibly a part of the North. For every statement.^ At reeds. Dr. col.' •In Asiyriaca. the near one a sheep. who produced a beautiful ensemble very realistic and knew how to breathe life into his but very graceful figures. to the On the other hand. for the present only the important argument drawn from Lugalzaggisi's inscription No. have older forms for sag and llis'namo siguifles "lord is show other characteristic features of high antiquity. 38) into a monogram.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. Cf Deliizsch. and in response to a repealed invitation from the President and Secretary of I Philosophical Society of Great Britian. above p. or Ba'u (cf. Its first ruler of whom we know En-shagsag-ana. which belongs to about the same period. That the Semites were already in the country results. ' The sheep is probably also derived front Eastern Persia and sheep. tlie which is an ally of the domestic is has resemblance also to the Armenian wild sheep Oois gmelinii. A. which from the inscriptions of Nebuchadrezzir II and other latest Babylonian kings. show us a real Old Babylonian master.OR. 47 CONTENTS AN^D HISTORICAL RESULTS. Cope. Cf. Cf. can- not be decided. No. The primitive the same writing style of art. 90. and such details as the headdress of the god. scanty material at my disposal this sketch can only be tentative in With the very many points. I have my decided reasons. part II. e. 38. Professor of Zoology and Compaiative Anatomy. 213.. same age. 90-93) have the oldest form of mu. sian. II. * It has the most ancient forms for dam and mu and shows a very characteristic feature of the oldest period cf V riling by contracting the name of Jiin-din-dug(-ga).

patesi of ^Nippur. Mama. p. »Cf No." may have stood in No. Nos. QescMchte. mentioned also by Edingiranagin. 3. 36-41. I. 30-33."' Ur'* and Larsam^ were and doubtless other places whose names are not yet known from prominent cities in this early inscriptions. to Bel. of a king of the second dynasty of Ur. title The chief local administrator of the tem- ple in ^Nippur seems to have had the damJcar gaU This I infer from IS^os. The ! identification of such a ruce of much 5. more kalama. col. above.\e patent gal Inlil (PI. As a result I should say the figures represent is The hooked nose and large eyes on the conan Aryan race with some Semitic tendencies. 4-14 Erech is the capital of Lugal kigub-nidudu and Lugalzaggisi and is promiobserve \_N. The traces do not point to the ideo- gram of Unug. and tion as being obtained who called himself patesi gal Inlil. dam-kar gal. amu shub. This title characterizes bearer. this which seems to have been devoted by very [Ur]-Enlil. of the kings of the dynasty of Isin en (shega) Unuga^i B. 51.gage 274)]. No. The fact that a patesi. for the life of Ur-Inlil." 1. to . and the kings and governors were satisfied with the •Cf. Dingir pateni Inlil. is "To Ba'u Ur-Enlil the chief agent {scil. la-muna sJmb]. patesi of Nippur. 'li7iffir Meme in later texts old Bnbylonian contracts (the last two owe 97. No. col. also the important position which Erech holds in the titles Hommel. to Jensen). *Cf. "merchant. 3. the reading of this line as Unugki. 80 and 87. i. especially 87. 23.din-dug ga Ur-Mu-ma dingir [djam-kar 4.^ to define his posi- by divine authority. 'Cf. 'It The people evidently have no Mongolian tendencies. his son Enanatuma). often occupied a political position as king or governor. If anything. and especially p. 26. Camhyset. translation of damkar.' It stood under the especial care Kengi was the sanctuai*y of of every ruler who claimed supreme authority over the country. 33-37. "To Ba'u Ur(e. nently mentioned in Edingiranagin's inscriptions. the ideogram goddess Mami II R.48 features of a OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS mixed it race. 306. representing him in his dealings with his subjects Cope wrote me on and this subject : in other words. this character renders the physiognomy very trary are Semitic. 3) and the Ma-ma cf. lugal which is only preserved in part. Babylonian kingdom.. which stood under the control of a patesi. according to his religious position. is is an absolute palseographic impossibility. No. Nin-din-dug. in addition. p. p. my analysis of the meaning of damhar and from the '• inscriptions of 94 and 95 in connection with Ko. . and among other points. 90. 95: [^mgir ji-]in. 5. Apparently an early time the god Ninib received the title W\. Altorientalische Forachungen III. 8. preceded by Cf No. agent references I dingir ' of Enlil presented it. many passages. and in For in of Gula. 87. II. as sovereign lord of a temple and chief servant of the god worshiped in it. also the fact that 'Cf. of Inlil) devoted (it). 145. 55. Cf. A similar title occurs in the inscriptions of Tello. 55a. No. 17). Ur-dmgir En-lil. g. where a certain Aba-Inlil presents a vase to I^inlil {== KUhit-Bel) who has the title of damJcar. "The shortness of the jaws however peculiar. ' sure beyond question (against Winckler. Nos. Winckler's reading of Part I. ' Prof. 86. official He is first of . 94: \.^ In all probability was Erech/' The religious centre of Inlil at Nippur. all the highest of his god.^ The capital of this early kingdom is likewise unknown. S.]. col. From the fragment of an inscribed stone the titles Bagdad I copied the phrase " dam kar DUN-GI. is certainly not a Semitic character in human faces. They had their its own sanctuaries. 96." [««£])irW(] too narrow in Cf also No. Cf. col. II. The current 2. interest [indeed it is of vital importance for the whole Sumerian question —H." Strassmaier. 87. 300. and followed by dingir Uru'^i-ka. I. as Sin-ga-mil. does not interfere with this view. patesi gal Ningirsu at (Entemena and Obv.

because he cannot designate himself as his own subject. illustration of tlie correctness of f. 'Cf.) presented for a-munashub. Fleuzey and myself for a long while.^ A its troublesome enemy of Babylonia at this early period was the city of Kish. sanga i^'iNin-su-gir (sic!) it"- But am now able to offer the following correct interpretation. The very fact that one Winckler. 4 with 8 and No. as becomes clear from a comparison of DingirEnUl-la{l) Inlil the 3. up to the time of his conquest. Briinnow. 71 ff. called the highest god of the him to fill this office. Kish. 4. 4. An 29t interesting monument from Assyriologists. Nos. 7i«[s/t«'i]- No. he is 49 title. A. Cf. it sonal devotion and energy of his human city's representative.) my I definition. 4. in the care of his temple and in the adrainistration of that territory over which Ningirsu ruled ia other word:'. No. " wicked of heart. limits of his and depend chiefly upon the popularity of his cult. pa-ie-si S/u>-[pur]-i[o*']. VIE." or ' For Kish is styled yul shag ' ga yul ' " teeming with wickedness. pat{e si'i 4. As soon as we have a clear conception of the latter. 6.. ga tillashu Inlil. 93. The condition of affairs is here plain." stales in general. It which therefore did not form part (any longer ?) of Kengi proper. but patesi as highest official of the . the perelse. Therefore he does not call himself king — which he already was — nor patesi in the tlie sense of our governor. composed of sa The whole phraseology seems to be Semitic rather than Sumerian is also «a?»ja artificial ideogram + ga).. Di/ijjirjifinUl 2. 1 13 reads as follows 7. in addition styles himself patesi of Lagash. fiir but his view as to the meaning and use of the word patesi worfenen Konige Hc-uzey in Revue ist entirely incorrect ("diegebrauchliclie Bezeichnuog die unter- in p. 233ff. of all necessary to determine the political power of the god's city in each indi- vidual case. Ililprechl. 113. pp. A The name means Sharrukurumat-shame. pp. recently published by d' AayHologie. as the legitimate possessor of all the privileges which. 3." This valuable document (cf.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. "To abundance of life. god Ningirsu. in The conqueror seeks to represent to the people and to the priesthood his violent act as having been committed the service of their god and carrying out his decision." Apparenlly a sjn . is written plionetically 112. nam-ti No. its patesi. 6f. had apparently to own peculiar cult and stood under the administration of a far patesi. which I share I with Tiele {Z. and sought ereiy opportunity to encroach upon the territory of his southern neighbor. 108 and 109 (portions of the same vase). and. Tello. 1. is and of the Babylonian kingdom in particular. 113. important in more than one way. self. Lugal-kurum-zigam "Ddcision Nmsugir has appointed the king of Kish is as priest of Ninsugir. food of heaven " (" Der Koaig ist Himmelsspeise"). 103.- who was eager extend his influence beyond the limits of his cit}'. damdamunashu it temple of No. had been connected with this title. more than anything upon the strength and valor of the is first army. "The king Shirpurla. S'l-gir mu-gin." III. Recent Research in Bible Lands. an excellent p. dumu ad-dage (sct'J. 1. we have But the key to title itself its a correct understanding of the position and privileges of the does not express any reference either to the political dependence or independence of bearer. In order to define them accurately. : Z/J«i 4039. and other The inscription to which had defied the united efforts of Oppert. 81! Lugal ! Sin. refer H'lmmel {Oesehichle. Altorientalise7ie Fonchungen origin gives a very good analysis of the relalioQ of a god to his city and of the and growth of Oriental Babylonien putesi. im ga(n). for the Ninlil life and son of the ada of the of his wife and child. 373). The beginning (No. 234). 2. expressly declaring that Ningirsu himcity. serves as p. 4. *No. 108) is to be restored as follows: DinijirZa\ma-ma'\ ' U-diig- . Oa 5. the legitimate possessor of all the privileges connected with this These privileges vary according to the sphere of power which a god exercises beyond the temple or city. foreign conqueror of who is already a king.. Lugil-kurum zigura is patesi of Sliirpurla.

103 begins) . . 91 and 5. p. Ill. 6. is No.CO patesi of OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS K^sh presented a large sandstone vase to Inlil of Nippur. 13c). 22. including the sanchis northern tuary of Bel. lord of Shumer (king of Erech)]— when he had looked favorably upon him (=nas7i« ska in hii. contains part of the same inscription. ga-iU-la-shu a-mu- 7ia[-«7. B.. the in- scription as follows [lv'\gal 1. Ill. 1C3. 117) -ga (<'i'"mrSimvga 11. ginJinig-ga-bi 2S. —his city teeming with ma= the utensils and his statue. A. dubsar ada fUnmrlCn-lilka-ge 8. 9297. part 1. agrees in thickness. which has remnants of -|- 1-4 of No. "To Ninlil Uiunabadabi. I restore be continued by No. nig-ga EUli'^i yul shag a-mu-na-ihvb. No. alana-bi (observe the peculiar sign for bi in 24. Enne-Ugun.. gg 73.- he burned. i/d dingi-rlEn-liUi] mana-ni-yun-a (cf No. 4. 103-1-110 belong to the same vase. his shining silver. No. di^ffirJSn-lil-la a mu-na-s7iub ["To N. 4. he l)rought l)ack. his property. higal 113. 92. belongtolwoothervases. Tableau. he cast dovin (or bound? cf Jensen . J3. a synonym of shallatu " spoil. M. 103 110 and belonged doubtless to the same vase. for abundance of faithful life of presented it for the life of his (distributive := their !) good his (their) wife and child. [en Ki-engi'\ 8. c." The reading of the name of the king of Kish of course only provisional. and lor the scribe of the ada of the temple of Inlil (. 102. to insciiption the bcginnirg 2. Thefragment of afourth 1.) 10. L'rSimvg (Amiaud 9. priest of Inlil. for abundance of and Ur-Siuiuga ('servant of Ea').sic. is As tlie sepaialing lines tlearly prove. and porarily he was even in possession of an important part of Kengi. = E&\) 6. mu-ne-gi 20. (t. mif-rcad the name of the donor. 112. gan-til lanliu 1. p. mv-dvr 12. list 88C2. same sanctuary as Sehrader's K. En-sliag aagan-na 3. pp. 4) 17-18 (or more) wanting 19. Name 11. Dhiairj^in. [DingirEnlil-la 6. for cf No.'n Ninerinuihr en-nun ^ na>a.«J]. No. 106: 1. 20. damdvmuria-ihu 13. ga-tila-shu nam-ti ama dvg(. 21) is purely Sumerian. (No. azag-tagina-U Inlil. being composed of nam-j-n-faff (V iJ. II tlie home fiitlier victoriously.. 'Cf. : and 2. 102." the etymology of which was ob- Part I. . Biiinnow. En-ne-Vgun (Biiin- now. . the name not Ur-Eidil hut rr-Enlil dalidvdv). sJm needs a word of explanation. call attention to the fuct that the woid nnmrag "spoil. shows us that temenemy.. 105 had a briefer inscription than the is rest.«M anu. part 1." he carried was born unto him. Enshagsagana himself waged war against Inlil presented the spoil of this expedition to other king of Kengi. king of Kisli^ silver. Of the longer 104. 25. Hin-cnnu !) (cf. he inlestcd Kish. vase. Sehrader's A'. his property. [Dlnglr E'\n-Ul-la 2. Ivgal erim ffin'iBAWi-ka-ge 13. it 114. presented the pioperty of Kish. and molhtr." My constant transliteration of the postposition " ku" by PI. Divgir^incl[in'\dvg-ga 2. Auyr. Mechineau.. corresponding to Assyrian shallatu shah'du (cf Delilzsch. N. [&']re W*-i-s/m 25. 1-5) EisltK mu-gvl 9. 5. 1. and that the old Babylonian sign I." In connection with this text I scure (cf. 134) dingir/in-lil 4.ada e identical with the frequent title of life the later contract literature abu litH). (where Jensen and Amiaud. I. EUhi<i-ge 14. 104 and 105. The same was done by anHe infested Kish and defeated in the Jensen in king. king of Kish the king of the hordes of lignity. or even captiu'ed its of Nippur. ol this postposition transliterated by ku is rather identical with the cliarac- ter in Part PI. of the king 7. List 4039. . 132). vru-na ga (written phonetically yul 15. that no Sumerian postposition ku exists. Nop. to be supplemented by No. 9 e.). 2. 105 and WQl)." 'Several vase fragments mention this event. a mu-na-i/ivb. (alter a break of sivcial lines) to be closed with No. the utensils.ru presented lor I abundance of life. 13. 113 reads : 1. 57f. 4. 4. wicked of heart (refening to Kish). B.ui-ra I'm na-budabi ct 10. 102. I c. 5) 3.')-zi-thu life. the first preserved portion. which I identifitd as shu (I. Biiinnow. material and characters of writing «ntiiely with Nos. Ivgal Ei>7J=i 86. p. believe with Jensen. which contain portions of the same inscription and supplement part of the text. List 10545). Nos. also No. . No.'/'«''BAN*"*. the property . but the whole iriscriptitn cannot jet be restored from them. 110.f ). Lvgalen-nv. No. No. his shining . however. nig-ga 10 bil =gan. namti 12. wives and children." Apparently two brothers who held two different Cf. he presented unto Inlil of Nippur..^!. Nos. positions in the temple of Eel presented together this beautiful vase for their mother. II is i?... e 5. " To Inlil E.' who lived shoitly before or after. with 8 and No.'- " His statue. He was apparently a Semite. 13 f. 23. cf Jensen in Z. Gram. wanting. 48) Enne-Ugun. which supplement each other: 1. lord o( lands. For C. 2. his liappy presented a vase to the temple. [Ivgal lvi-hvr-ra 3. snrig (Amiaud et Mechineau. 3. Nos. and p. "To'Qa. 13 . and deposited Cf.

and the rest of Babylonia down to the Persian gulf Lugalzaggisi was. we do not know. The name is possibly to be read Semitic. and at this tini3 was. we find the two mentioned famous cities in exactly the same close association as they appear on Edingiranagin's stele of vultures. king of Kish. scarcely. It is therefore evident that the king of Kish was not only an was this ally of '""'BAT^T'. heaven and lie cannot have lasted very long.' it To judge from the analogy of other inscriptions of have no doubt ' contained the acquired land or province of which Kish had itself now become the capital. At last ""''BAN' little was prepared of it to deal the final blow to the ancient kingdom of Kengi. Kengi) was already under the which came from the appealed at the threshold of the ancient Sumerian kingdom of Kengi. in fact." 41. I broken away. in. if fell an easy prey to the conquer- ing hero. Kengi to How long he ruled.uil ^Traces of lugal are clearly visible ' in 1. And even if a temporary reaction occasionally should have set the weakened South could not withstand the youthful strength and valor of its northern enemies for any length of time. that Kish (which at this early time ISTorth." In other words. XVIf. "Servant of SliulpauJdu. Oilgamesh gitmala emitka. col. .CHIEFLY FROM predecessor. For he is styled " king of the hosts of "'"'BAX*'. «. p. its Kish formed the basis of against Kengi. Erech opened its doors. however. how far his kingdom extended. patesi of "'"'BAN'V was this time himself the chief commander of the approaching army. and was constantly pushing southward. 102)." Cf. and whether he was able So much its is hold his conquests. mistress of earth. Ur-Shulpauddn. The son of " Ukush. 51 from the votive inscription with which the Babylonian ruler accompanied his gift (No. 93). I infer from and other passages. must have dealt a fatal blow to the kingdom of Kengi. the Babylonian monarch who defeated Enne-Ugun.. ths great centre in the North which out its conti'olled the movements of warriors in the South. 8. in all probability himself a native of I In other words. I. tha ex- treme outpost of the advancing hordes of '""''BAIS'*'. Nimrod Ep. believe formed originally part of control of a foreign people. */. The same name occurs occasionally in the early contracts of Nippur Scheil in Recr. ' A hero indeed. No. 39 . 13. and to Ninlil.. 87. continued to send marauding expeditions against Babylonia. Cf. several inscribed vases " to For another king of Kish. however there may have been left. this country.^ presented lord of lands. It is highly interesting to learn NrPPtTIl. military opsrations. consort of Inlil" (N^o. but as commander of an army of "^''BAN^*-'. 5. C2rtain. serving as a border fortification The success of Inlil. we can trust his own long inscription and Telle. and was therefore in the possession of Nippur. is for besides his usual title lugcil K\sh he assumed another. that the king of Kish apparently had connections with the city of "'"''BAN'. which unfortunately this period. "The king is filled with unchangeahle power.

5. I. mistiess of Erech. The philological problem. dingirjifin-Tiar sag 30. although often I enough not more than a few for this traces of the original cliaracters I guide me. of Nin-harsag. great patesi IG. but am obliged to withdraw it from want of In the previous and following pages nearly two-thirds of the whole inscription have been treated. that each of the lines. dicmu tu-da dmjirm. The of the titles themselves with which he opens his dedication are a reflex of the great : achievements he could boast of woi-ld. of Nidaba. 1 (and 2). flwgirKn ne-guh 34. gala mug \2. the first I noticed that the lines of each of the first two columns must be identical.<im'rNidnba-ka 18. patesis of Tello. B.daba ga a 39. 8. the present work. by Nin-a-gid-ga'-du. 49.' OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS carved over 100 times on as many large vases. Ill. " Lugalzaggisi. 23. zu 23. The difference of the It numbers of between the second and third lines I could easily determine by a simple calculation. 31. of Nidaba. + jrj»7t ("man") synonym. Cf. No. 9. 3.igizi MngirEn-lil 17. XIX. 81. 7. patesi of "'^'BAN". On I the basis of palajographical evidence I selected 150 pieces out of aheap of COO fragments and particles. shib An7. No. note 6. mupad33. By doing lines beginnings and ends of each column. . this I obtained the Then succeeded in placing the five fragments on PI. in another place very soon. cf.)). 2G.^ 25. he favoiably looked upon by the eye of Lugalkurkura 15. filled wiih " {shuznunu). lug zi ku. 21. hero 12. which finally proved to be correct. can now be restored completely. Jensen in Schraiier's K..a7. 41. Lugal-zag-gisi Ivgal Unugkiga 5. col. by Utu. sublime minister^ 22. dinai^Lvgalkur kur ra ''ingirutu 21. a peculiar form of ga (not =iyi). Inlil). was restored by myself from 88 fragments of 64 under the most trying circumstances. it was a palocographical and c. 10. sag gith. king of Ana. Ill. sag eyi-a 32. of Enzu (=Sin). 'Literally "ate" is I. 25f. together. was more difficult to find out the exact number of lines of which the first and second columns originally consisted. variant 87. col. 34. 7. priestess of Erech. by Enki - (== Ea). 34. is ^ He was llie one of the gi'eatest monarchs of the ancient the longest complete inscription of historical fourth and fifth pre Christian millenniums so far obtained from Babyit is and as a document of this ancient period of fundamental importance. Ill. nourished with the milk of life 29.52 of 132 lines. I fi . above. fosteier of Xinna. hero 8. 13-14. ^The 'No.'^ 30. a slave brought up 32. son of Ukush. Part The titles of Lugalzaggisi are not unsimilar to those of kings und ^Cf. dingirri-ite-ra. 4. had the complete translation prepared volume. 19. different vases The text published on Pis. No. dingirutu 35. 3. which in every case confirmed the correctness of my arrangement. Col. priest Col. forty-six I arrived at the By calculating the original circumference. of Inlil. 4. 3. G. 28. dvmu U-kush pa te si gal 16. Part No. d'ngirNina gid yadu nin Unvgkigaka Hi {?) mug 35. he who was invested with power 24. unto whom who was called (chosen) 20. 1. faithful U. as the separating lines run from to the last column. according to the passages needed.' 'Cf. p. who was 19. 3 . by Utu. which he presented to the old national sanctuary of the country in Nippur. servant of Umu. 15. d"i'JirNidiiba 9. a son begotten 27. combinations. 17. 23 and variants. space. by Nidaba. DiiigirEnAil lugal kur kur-ra 10. galu mag da 20 28. 87." 'It lonia. galu di-ngirUtuu sanga Unug^i-ga 31. 21. mag 33. X^. and making a number of first logical conclusion. king of Erech. (akalv) or "was 2. 5. Since the restoration of my Haynes has found many duplicates. two columns had were and the third only forty Then followed the tedious work of arranging the liltle Iragments and deterleft to mining their exact position. the great abarahku of the gods. he who was intelligence was given 18. [pa-<]e-si!7«Afij4iV*« 11. 33. List 919. lugal kalam-ma G. work was just as much a mathematical task as c. 38-42. A complete coherent transliteration and translation will be found text. 1. dlngirEN-Kl 27. gishPl-SUU-svvi-ma u-a <''»girMnnn 36. bar-ra 14. e. he (^. *One expects apparently is its rather the ideogram for shakkanakku (Briinnow. Ne ("power") I.

III. kur kvrOO u la 18. which manifestly nam-lcgal lalama. kur-kur{a)ne na 5. but they have title little importance for the question as to localized at all its origin and earliest localization. gira-bi 16 ^ 11. Col. p.' Lugalzaggisi retained Erech. as a whole. According to the manner of usurpers. defined by the boundaries (Part I. Well stated by Wincklcr. who. Ud divgirEn-lil 37. pn-te-si kur kur-ra. Of p. own filled poetical language ""When lord of the lands. col. who assumed as far the proud as Syiia ^ we know now from Pis." that only IS^ippur can have been the ancient seat of the sharrut kihrat arhaHm. 25). a. 36. invested Lugalzaggisi with the kingdom of the woild and gi-antcd him success before the world. "lord of the lands. . Babylonian sense foiu* of the word. in which Lugalzaggisi declares himInlil self to have been invested with the kingdom of the world by of A'ippur. ga-a 46. if the must be hazards. extending from the Persian I quote the king's Gulf to the shores of the Mediterranean.a)-ahu H.bar Kien-gi 23. 44. Uta eQi)ta. He his lived long before Sargon I founded his famous empire. etc. ma nasum maa 1. The later Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions are of title value for the determination of the meaning of this at their own time.ho\xi (leteriii. Inlil. the early kings of Babylonia this title But. Ki-mi-nadi sttl i'ta e(a)-la 13. ma-ni-sig 7.)-6i(=: "and"') ab-ba9.'</ul la mu-da-ga (. mu-ni dug. p. Col. mu-da-na. etc. of which Kengi became now the chief province. ' Babylonia. kithim ' ma 30. igi kalam-ma-ge simanadi-a 3. I. Ufa shu(. and he called a in kingdom own which no way was inferior to that of his well-known successor. 4). as his own new capital of this first great Oi'iental state.anagar-ra-a wta-bii 4. loo little lo call liiin an exception. 42. be it remembered. and note 4) that thoy h:id made conquests and Elam. to city meant more than a mere possession of the whose god claimed the time of right of granting the sJtarrut Tiibrai arhaHm. 0. Baranunu{vi\\. had conquered a quasi worldwide dominion. 8. Ivgal hur-kur-ra 38. 53 and 58 above. a ab ba sigta ta \2. II. laid claim Down really to the Hammurabi only those to this significant title in the who owned natural territory far beyond the north and south of Babylonia. the kings of '61 llie second dynasty of Ur. kalam-ma 41. [^U"'j'trE'\n-lilli 15 nin. 19..: CHIEFLY FKOM NIPPUB. 234.= shaLanu) 21.!!. Altorientalische Forschungen Cf. Lugalzaggisi Idigna nam-lugal 40. when he the lands with his renown (power) (and) subdued (the countiy) from the of the sun rise of the sun to the setting — It at that time he straightened his path from the lower sea of the Tigris and Euphrates to the upper sea and granted him the dominion of everything (?) from the rise of the sun to the setting of the sun and caused the countries to rest (dwell) in jieace. and yet his very 53 name had been forgotten by later generations. (cf." ^ becomes evident from this passage. Ulu shu{n). iginimma-sJiulO. Of Dungi we know title. gu n. 4Z. a- nhu 2. II. bar.^ had no fault 39. I is but the later Semitic rendering of the ancient Sumerian all have examined the passages in the fresh light of this text and find that Nippur fulfills bj' far better the required conditions than Kutha or any other city which has been proposed in Xorthern Babylonia. East. the old metropolis of the counti-y.

On the we have seen how these hordes were pushing gradually southward.' Larsa - temples to shine in their new splendor. but. by a king of "'"'BAX*' (De Sarzec. llie top of heaven. and Nippur^ received equal attention from devoted patesi. The Sumerlan . was raised by his energy and glory to a position of unheard-of Influence and stands out from the political power. c. Lugalzaggisl full dawn of Babylonian history as a giant who deserves our admiration for the work he accomplished. points with necessity to the north for the this peculiar As form of the character for lugal so far has only been found in such cuneiform inscriptions as contain Semitic words written phonetically. it and Kish combined. De is Saizuc. PI. 'As becomi's evident from ' and from the extraordinary number of vases presented Cf. beyond question. 183. and whose chief ancient city." as Maspero' tempted to do. 30-3'3. to Inlil. U. apparently but two centres of the same powerful people which was roaming over the doubtless was '""'BAN*'. Larsam''i ur dingirUtu-ge a-ne-yiilla mu-da ga. More on this suliject and on "the Semitic influence in early cuneiform writing all in general in another place. 5.54 to find with into tills OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS new and powerful regime. then. But of all. we can scarcely conceive. on the basis of strong this charac- arguments must be read as Semitic. for the present al)Ove. location of our city. p. After for a number of years they had concentrated their attacks upon the border fortifications of Northern Babylonia and had established a military station and kingdom in previous pages was but a question of time when the whole country in the South had to succumb to their power. by the preceding invasions and victories of the Xorthern hordes to which he belonged. whence it came and how it arose. My in above statement the result of a complete and exliaustive examination of the published cuneiform material which the peculiar form of lugnl occurs. 33-37. with long but unknown history. the native city of the great conqueror. "Ur like a steer he raised to cf. 608. civilization was directed Erech. We had been its prepared for the collapse of the ancient monai'chy on the Persian Gulf. 3). Xo. p. "'"''BAX*' itself. p. 'Cf. is stronghold What is this "'"'B AX*'? Is That we have not to place it "in Suslan territory. UrunJ'i ma guda-gim king liia titles »ng ana-shu mu-um gur. we are forced to the conclusion that 'Col. in There is no doubt first in my mind that Lugalzaggisi's achievements Babylonia represent the signal success of the invading Semites from the Xorth. . also Ileuzcy in The Paitniif CitHhaiion. first new channels and prevented from stagnation its tiic ancient cults between the lower Tigris and Euphrates began to revive and Ur. F(irffi«*BAN'"' ibidim. And yet when suddenly this great empire of Lugalzaggisl stands before our eyes as a fait accompli. He did not appear unexpectedly on the scene of his activity. fertile steppes of Mesopotamia. 49. II." 'Col. The oldest written monuments of Babylonia do not designate these enemies by any single definite name: they are the hordes of the city of "'"'B AX*' Kish. note 1. I c. 38-43. or in other texts ' which are written ideograi^hically. The ideogi-am for lugal on an inscribed object of Tello and presented I.

aside from other reasons. beginning with the end of the second millennium before Christ.. 75ff in Z. pp. is masc. with which '^'BAN*' is doubtless identical. VIII. the ground-plot of Ilarran resembled that of the moon (?". because Harran was never mentioned a text before the period just stated. 204). however. is The remark of built.'' For according to Arabic writers. the Arabic writer is therefore more than a "Treppenwilz. Geschichte dtr Stadt Harran.'' I opposed it myself^ on the ground that his reasons proved nothing for the ancient time.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. All that could be gath- ered from later historical sources.' shows his nationality in various ways." very probable. Winckler.-mali-emxl'ci-ken.g. e. the ancient Babylonian ideographic rendering as " city of the is. Sachau. p. p. doubtless of Semitic origin (= <Za?*«)."^ There is only one ancient place in Northern Meso- potamia which could have been rendered as "the city of the -the bow" ideograph ically by Sumcrians. for " eternal. Ill. which and is name of the king must be read something like Sharru. Cassite names. this kind of abbreviation of a fuller name is without parallel in the history of Assyrian proper names. which remind us forcibly of the phraseology of the latest Assyrian monarchs. " he may pronounce (speak) forever !" * Cf. 'Part pp. showing us that not only the ancient Babylonians in but other peoples were struck by the remarkable form ' ' which Harriin was Sachau. but not in the middle." it proves for our final location of ""'BAX*'. finds it very natural that " Arabic ^ writers could conceive the idea of comparing with the form of the half-moon. 9. etc. da-ur yeme." " from the rising of the sun to the setting of the tun " and others. which look very suspicious in an ancient Sumerian inscription. who was surely a Semite. 223. namely Harran. in But the name cannot be regarded as the prototype of Sargon (:^ S/tarru-ke iiu) because. the crescent or half-moon). I. Excellent.. They aie abbreviated at the beginning or end. ' Col. especially I. that Lugalzaggisi. I have furnished a better basis for Winckler's ingenious theoiy of the original seat of the sharrut Mslishati. for This correct solution of a our whole conception of the vexed problem becomes of fundamental importance history of the ancient East. it who gave us the first accurate sketch of this city. pp. e.. as this Arabic description and valuable as bow " was a more faithful description of the peculiar way in Avhich Ilarran was built than any other. " and of great historical importance. by Jensen A. are foreign names. esipeclaW j Albiruni (ed. Cf. was invented and Furthermoi-e. ter. Winckler brought together to formulate a view which never found much in favor with Assyiiologists and historians. and Sachau. III. .. tern. as everybody can easily convince himself by throwing a glance upon Sacliau's plan in his Heise in Syrien and Mesopotamien. First of all. I{eise in Syrien vnd ifesopotamien. g. 201 ff. " from the lower sea of the Tigris and Euphrates to the upper sea. 228 ff. the the singular). 23 I was supported in this. . 36. in ifesopotamien. p. 55 while doubtless derived from the well-known Sumerian form.- and especially in his use of the ideogram da-ur. such as the use of certain phrases. also >[iz. I call attention to the important fact employed by a Semitic nation. and that in view of the total absence of a single ' If he did not adopt a Sumerian name when ascending the throne of Kengi and of the " kingdom of the world. pp.. Altorientalisehe Forschangen f. e. '^Cf.i I (emuia .

was definitely occupied by a Semitic population. ' In the inscriptions of Ur-Nina wriltcn wilUoul ki. Wiuckler.' (2) that many other ancient (cf Shirpurla). for the inhabitants of Babylonia as sliarrCd kislishati did for Cf. in the present work." a "' com- bination which Winckler himself regarded " naheliegend. and hav- ing furthermore indicated the powerful position which Harran must have occupied as the great Semitic centre of the ancient Orient. it as the seat of a From the fact that kingdom until we first proved that the city (1) Kish and Kisli (shatu) did not only sound in really ex- alike but were even used interchangeably Babylonian cities the inscriptions. When after many under Sargon I and K^aram-Sin finally the northern half of ancient Kengi. in his stele of vultures. Kish was not the principal controlled leader in this whole conquest." connecting A'tsW' with what stood before. c.56 OLD BABYLONIAN IN8CKIPT10N8 reference to this city in our whole ancient literature previous to 1500 B. as the Assyrian equivalent of the Sumerian nam-lugal Jcalarna. had been at his disposal for some time. In view of the leadfirst ing part that Harran had taken in the establishment of the " kingdom of the world " under Lugalzaggisi. p.are frequently written without a determinative. ("and " the f. . 144 f. 7 copula =: "and. Euphrates). we could not speak of isted. 23 '' Cf. including Tsippur. C." which the king of course did not want to say. docs not offer this at all. which spoko and wrote its own language. 'Not only 1890). Nov. as I have shown above. I simply had no use for if it (1) lugal Kish an ki 'u someit thing entirely ditlerent from lugal an-uh da tab iab-ba or lugal KISil. AUorientaliiche Furschungen II. city of Having fifth therefore demonstrated the existence of the Harran at the threshold of the failed to do. PI. (3) that the city of Kish played a very important role in the inscriptions of Edingiranagin. and fourth pre-Christian millenniums. the old Sumerian title nam-lugal kalama. which necessarily formed the starting point of my operations..5. for was possible to say so in Sumerian. but by power in the Xorth. col. note 1. Arch.Die Identitat der alteslen London {Proe. Parti. pp. 11. Soe.' I inferred that shai' KISH meant originally " king of Kish. Harran. which carried the ' same meaning I. II.. "and the king of KiA. to the But notwithstanding in the great importance which must be attached was kingdom of Kish a greater connection with the final overthrow of the ancient empire of Kengi. DM.' (4) that all the ancient empires arose from city kingdoms. it : 242). p. pp." inotherwords 87. (3) could only mean " king of the whole heaven and earth. Ilommel was of the opinion babylonUchen und cigyptisehen Oottergenealogie. that tlie passage in the latter text escaped my attention. but also in the inscription uncartlied in (. I am now prepared to accept Winckler's I regard the title theory of the original seat of the sJiarrut kishshati without reserve. The text biia but must be translated lagal Kish':' -bi-na-dib-bi. and from several other considerations. Harran became the seat of the Semitic sJiarrtd kishshati just as ^Nippur vicissitudes was the centre of the Sumerian nam-lvgol kaloma. •Cf. which Winckler although Edingiranagin's inscriptions.

an even larger one of c. (3) one ( I) X VII. ebrated their victoiy. 57 the Semites of itic sliarrid Xorthem Mesopotamia. 80 of my published texts belongs doubtless to the same general its period as No. which restored a temporary power and influence over the greater part of Kengi to them. thirty lines. The later Sumerian nam-lugal ""ub-da-tah-tab-ha is title nothing but a translation from the Semitic back into the sacred Sumerian lan- guage bj Semitic scribes of the third millennium B. Although No. following:' We learn life from the "When Inlil. in the famous stele of vultures set Erech and Ur played a prominent part in this national war.xcavated after the preparation of my PI. 86. when he added lordship to kingdom. and his emblem -the lion-headed eagle with outspread wings. Semitic invaders. imijressed the jects. (5) No 88. Sugir gen- which Urukagina or one of his predecessors raised from the obscurity of a provincial purla. C. power and glory of their warlike deity upon their sub- The cult of Nin-Sugir cannot be separated from the national uprising which Edingiranagin at last felt started from his sanctuai'v. Lugal-kigub-nidudu preInlil. No. strong enough to shako off the obnoxious yoke of the Semitic oppressors of Kish and Harran. which was fought must have been very bloody. The decisive battle The Sumeriaus won it. and they celup by Edingiranagin. his sented this for the great and joyful lot (which he received) unto ' beloved Cf. lord of Sugir.37 contained the closing lines 17-19. disappeared and was translated into the SemTcihrat arhaHm. occasionally appearing in connection with two which are victoriously clutched in its powerful talons^ —ba- came the coat-of-arms of the city and characterizes best the spirit of independence in its which was fostered sanctuary. . CHIEFLY FBOM NIPrUB. PI. ruler: (1) X brief legend of three lines (cf. especially with those of Edingiranagin. l^ot long after Lugalzaggisi's death a reaction seems to have set erally transliterated as Girsu. establishing Erech as (the seat of) the lordship (the empire) and Ur as (the seat of) the kingdom.. The former retained its place as the capital of the nam-en (of Kengi). Urukagina's successors. wliich . in. and to regaid it as about contemporary with the inscriptions of the kings of Shirpurla. announced unto Lugal-kigub- nidudu. especially' Ur-]N^ina. devoted their time to building temples and fortifying the city of Shirpurla and. a detailed examination of pal8eograi)hic peculiarities leads me it to place it somewhat later. as I infer from No. Heuzey's treatise Le» Armoiries C/ialdeennes. 87. the loid of the lands. 14). The precise connection l)etwecn the upper and lower porlions on cannot be given at present. but Ur seems to have furnished the new dynasty. (3) one of nineteen lines. Of the lliird class a fragment was e. The lions. tliis ^Five different legends liave been found of of seven or eight lines (cf PI. town to the leading position in the must be regarded '• as the centre of a national new kingdom of ShirSumerian movement against the became the principal god. 39). plates." Nin-8ugir. as faithful patesis.

gu-zi manade 13. Shamaslmhumukin. Lvgal-sfdrge e. mu-ag-ge 12. etc. Ivgal kur-kur{a)-ye. amu-shnb. finished Ihe place" := Sliarru-mavzaiu-vs?iaklU. by which Southern Babylonia was known to the later Semitic populations. dam. meet the same use 1 f.. nam-en 17. . 89. also No. lanithu nam-ti ' aniv-nas!ivb'\. in Schrader's K." in this text interesting. On the reading of Sugir instead of Oirsu Ill. 11 * * e. Recent Research in Bible Lands. who f. 71 ff. . How long the restored Sumerian influence lasted we do not know. Lvgal-ki-gvb-nidu-du ne nam galyullada 2. 4.and his son (?) Lugal-ki?al-si' we have therefore the first representatives of the first dynasty of Ur. I. e. \>. «/(«.'' ^ \ . . "The king Or ' Lvgal-si-kisal. Master in reading cuneiform tablets as he was.e.. 296. The relation of this dynasty to Edingiranagin shrouded in absolute It is not impossible that its members ruled before him and were Semites Apparently who overthrew the dynasty of Lugalzaggisi. 120 ff.. he could not have made a blunder which would scarcely happen to a beginner in Assyriology.dumu-na-da. I can prove from other examples. from the city of Sugir or Sungir. pp. nam-ti16. ud 11.^ which was the centre of the national uprising of the South against the foreign invaders from Kish and Harran. e. a 6. life. Lvgal-kigub-ni-du-dura 9. Cf. namlugal(a)da 15. pp. I derive the Akkad. I am inclined to regard them as father p.58 lord for his OLD BABYLOKIAN INSCKIPTIONS CHIEFLY FKOM KIPPUR. must hereafter Ur-Gnr and Dungi. dam 4. pp. The names cities of Shumer and Akkad are therefore but the historical reflex of the final struggle between the Sumerian and itic races. 3 f. for. 8. ff. In his person and work we see but a repetition of that which had happened under Lugalzaggisi centuries before. ma-na-da-tubbaa \%. 2. be reckoned as members of the second is dynasty of Ur. dingi'rEn-lU is . 86. But even if this was not the case. left many fragitents of vases in Nippur. Paradies. 3. No. hignl ki-a[ga-ni 1. Sem- and they were derived from the two which took the leading part in it. Delilzsch. stands with Lvgal-ii-kieal on PI." which became the capital of the Sargonic empire. From the close connec- tion in which Lvgal-kignb-nidvdu. c. 37. already Amiaud in The Babylonian and Oriental Record j I. 10. 67. UrumJ''--ma nam- Ivgal muagge 19. Amiaud. 7 and We f. 2. 290. 11 f. 198) should be sufficient. restored Sargon I finally what had been lost against Edingiranagin. Vniig^ go. part 1. 7. Ill 1. — 1. "unio. the clear statement of George Smith original mistake (cf. With George Smith. 292." Sharru thapik-kisalU. and son.'" In Lngal-kigiib-nidudu. etc.' mystery. B. No. Dinffir En-Ul. ' p. From the city of Agade. 1. i. p. di'nairEn-Ul-H 5. Hommel and others (against Lehmann. Cf. "The king is the builder of the terrace. who lived about 1000 years later. cf. Cf. also Honimel. 18. I cannot admit the possibility of a on the part of George Smith. IZ). but the name of Shumer. Oachichte. nam-en 14. . Hilprecht. was derived the Semites were soon again in possession of the whole country. name of Northern Babylonia. ThaX Agade can go over into Akkad philologically. The old name Kevgl continued to live as an ideogram in the titles of kings. cf. (note). in its political totality 'That Akkad became onstrated by finally identical with "the Babylonian empire and unity. in The use of : rfa =. l>mgirNindin-dug ga amanin 3." was dem- Lehmann. and Jensen.

Ab bee viations. III. B. T. Inscr. Plate.. Collection. Nippur I. Mus6e Imperial Oltoman. length (height) X width x thickness. Pbo. Z. Description. If more than one fragment is quoted. No. ibidem. col. edited by 0. On fragments placed in parentheses. c. fragment(s). meter. Reverse. M. beginning. Z.. volume. 9608 + 9679 + 9)91 (belonging to the same vase as 9000. inscription... University of Pennsylvania (prepired by the editor). sq. inscr. Nos.... 21 other fragm. Coll.Table ok Contents And Part Description of Objects. e. Autograph Eeproductions. var. Maspero.. 15 (orig. Whenever the object varies ia restored. M.9609 (cf.. Nos.. f. follow. Dynasty. South(ern).. Catalogue of the Babylonian Museum. of a large vase in serpentine.. Photograph m. cf. to the corresponding original(ly) . Q. Temple of Bel... 1). North(ern).from (the) end. C. as a rule less tlian one or two complete cuneiform characters are preserved.. M.or 4. ants. Plates 36-70 ayid XVI-XXX. variWest(ern). East(ern). Obv. Number. Rev. height. S. 9825... confer. p. re. horizontal. orli.. vol. column(8). pp. etc. c.... right and lower margins of Plates 36-43 refer to C. JVI. size. or resp. B.. 36 Text. refers numbers on Plate XV. Ziqqurratu. Keciieil. the largest measurement is given. Measurements are given in centimeters. perpendicular. diameter.. ca. and denote the vase fragments used in restoring the cuneiform texts here published. 20. circa. N.8. Recueil de travaux relalifs a la philologie et a I'archeologie figyptiennes et assyrlennes. X 9. the fragments of the most ancient stone vases so far excavated in Nuffar (approximately therefore the 1. Dyn. following page. angular. the latter that an unknown piece is wanting between them. of vases in calcite stalagmite (from which the text had been restored before 9825 was found and examined): C. cast.5 Plate. cf. restor.... XVIII. respectively. Fragra. the former indicating that the breaks of fragments thus joined fit closely together... fr. 11. . Nippur little III. The numbers printed on the I. 86 Date. Numbers. Portions of these 15 preserved on the follow. omit. C. ang'ill..45 X 2. line(s). Bezold. following. squeeze. 2-5. on the S. Lugal-klgub-nidudu.. PL. PI. horizont. 41-43).. fragmentary.. a above Ur-Ninib's pavement in the same stratum as has proall duced nearly as PI. oriff. B.. . Zeltschrift fiir Assyriologie. following pages. PL 37 and PI. 9581 + 9643.. d.. II. or fragin. Fragments originally belonging to the same vase are connected by -1. II...4. I.. pages. W. beneath the rooms of T.. Obverse. left.. omitted. beginn.. ff. A. f. orig. at least 30) 11. same place No. h. 1.X -|-.. d. perpend. E. E. B. 9657 -f 9607 4.. ibid. edited by G... M. side of Z. they are arranged according to their relative importance. page.

37 86 Lugal-kigub-nidudu. 87 Lugalzaggisi.60 Plate. Text. 39 .

B. same place as M. Inscr. approximately same place as PI. 86. No. 4. 9963 + 9998. 44 100 Same Period. 36. inscr. No. 45 103 Same Period. Two 1. For the beginn. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. ^ Fragm.8 x 5. 43. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. 1. 1.5 Nippur III. 4. approximately same place as PI. C. cf.3 x Nippur li. M. 1. Aba-Enlil. side of the Shatt-en-Nil. No. 43 94 Ur-Enlil. of a vase in while calcite stalagmite (glued together). 1. approximately same place as PI. 12. B. B. 3 li. of a vase in dark brown sandstone (glued together). No. B. Inscr. Inscr. B.6 x m. III.5 x 2. Between the 37. the latter 1890).4 X 6. To the same vase belongs PI. M.1. PI. 43. Description. Fragm.9 X Nippur III. wanting. No. Fragm. 86. upper group 4 separated by a beginning on the right. M. 1-4 written also on C. Nippur III. 9. M. B. 9616 li. No. 8. 110. 10 li. round hole in the Parts of 2-7 written also centre. W. M. C. M. beginn. 44 97 [Ur ?]-Enlil. B. 43 92 86. 9614. of place in c. below surface. fragm. Same Period. 1. M.8 x 1. approximately same place as PI. 2 li. No. 968C.4. 9953. Nippur li. Inscr. Inscr. B. Fragm. of X 2. B. 1. 44 101 Same Period. Fragm. Inscr. 86. + 9931 (the former excavated 1890.. the last 2 line. 7. approximately same place as PI. 110. 8.2 x 4. 2 groups of figures 19. 5) li. No.5. 46.2. 7 C. 43 95 Ur-Mama. M.7. 96)2. probably 5) C. C. 103 and PI. approximately same place as PI. 44 96 1. in white calcite stalagmite. Inscr. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite.9 X 1. 1. U. B. 61 Date. 1. 20. the loose earth along the S. No. Sq. PI. 1. 9618. Nippur III. 45. En-shagsag(?)anna. two Nos. of the inscr. Two fragm. 8 U. 1..3 and an inscription incised . Plate. 4 (orig. 3 (orig. III. 9932. of each li.3X1. Nippur C. No. C. 5 li. Inscr. M. 4d ne of Ur-Shulpauddu. 44 99 86. 9952 + 9699 (the former excavated 1893. 3 (orig. 5. Fragm. i li. 5. B. approximately same place as PI. Two fragm. Text supplemented by the follow. B. 9954 + 9924. Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. 4 U. 12.5 X 6 XI. No. 46. PI.5 x 0. Nippur III. B. Inscr. Nippur III. x9X For the end 16. Inscr. the latter 1893). d. B. impure bluish gray limestone. of the hole 3. No. PI. of an alabaster bowl (badly decomposed).3X 1. Nippur li. 44 98 Same Period. 6 li. No. Cf. approximately li. No. No. 36. III. 1. C. M. Parts of li. X 6. XVI. 1. Nippur III. No. 9621+9617.2 X 7.2 X 1 . No. which apparently belongs to the same vase as PI. of a vase li. 1. 9297 (dark brown sandstone). Inscr.6.8 of a vase in biownish limestone with veins of white calcite. 43 93 Ur-Shulpauddu. approximately same place aa PI. Nippur X. 9622. Text. approximately same place as PL 36. Votive tablet in on C.7x6.6 X4. C. 1. Two fragm. 92. approximately same place as PI. M.6. No. 7 li. 9636.5 x 9. Inscr. 3. III.CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. cf.3. M. of the 91. . found out figures of the li.1. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite (glued together). 5) inscr. 36. M.1 x 3.

d.4. 4 C. 1.9 x 0. M. 46.51i. Inscr. 46 109 9572.3 x 1. 14. B. of.9 X 1. Text supplemented by PI. at the centre 17. B. M. No. 13. approximately same place as 9163 No. 45. No. approximately same place as PI..1. of the same vase (glued together). 1. 47 112 Time of Ur-Shulpauddu. at the bottom 8. of a vase in dark approximately sameplaceas Pi. 9. 1. of a vase in grayish calcite stalagmite. Text supplemented by 45 106 PI. 13 li. approximately same place as No. No.8. Two fragm. 48 116 Entemena. of a vase in bluish banded calcite stalagmite. mately same place as previous No. B.: 62 Plate. + 9629. Fragm. B. No. B.5. c. B.B. II 9571 + 9577. 103. = 9328 (excavated 1893). 2 col. M.1 x 9. B. To the same vase belongs the follow. of a vase in dark brown sandstone. III. approximately same place 9682 No. To the same vase belong the follow. Fragm. 17. 45 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS Text. M.4 X 7. Same Period. approximately same place as PI. approximately 47 113 A little later. X Nippur III. orig. 47 114 Same Period.7 X 1. of a vase in brownish gray calcite stalagmite. 7. B. 9330.M.7. No.4 x 7. Nippur li. M. . li.9. 1. No. No. 45. of a vase in dark brown sandstone (glued together). 110. 16. 9597. 45. 86. 103. 2 C. No. Inscr. 104.5 X 1. 86. 6 45 107 A patesi ('?) of Shirpurla. 9t00. No.3. Inscr.5. x 6. O. 4 C.9 x 2. 36. C. Fragm.3. approximately x 14. A patesi of Time Kish. III. d.5 x 1. 7 li. M. C. Nippur III. M. To the same vase belongs PI.8 86.4 X 2.. No. In3or. Nippur III. Nippur 111. approximately same place as PI. 4 + 3 7 li. of the same vase. 7 li. 9574 + 9675 4-9579. 105. 105 aud PI. 48 115 9655. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. 5 III. 2 col. orig. orig. Two fragm. 9919 + 9920 (both excavated 1893). approximately same place as li. Nippur 111. Inscr. Fragm.5 X 8. 1. 47 111 Time of Ur-Enlil. M. Nippur III. inside black- ened. 46. 1. Inscr. Inscr. Two fragm.35. Text supplemented by PI. B. Nos. Inscr. C. same place as PI.2 x 2. 14. B. 101 and PI. X 1. 13. PI. 86. 36. (beginn. 16. Nos. Nippur III. 110. 8 + 6 = 14 li. Inscr. 1.4 as PI. 1. 4 C. 1. 36. Nos. h. 6 li.7. approximately same place as PI. Inscr. 1. 7. two Nos. III. Inscr. 3. Fragm. C. same place as previous No.1 X 5 Nippur III. C.8 X 6. 9600 PI.7. c. outside black- ened. 1. 36.1 X Ux 1. Inscr. 17. 8 X 4.8. 45 105 Same Period. Fragm. 4. B.5. same place as PI.6. X 0. III. d. 36. of a vase in dark brown tufa. Entemena. X 11. approxili. Three fragm.9. a vase in bluish banded calcite stalagmite (glued together).1 X 0. No. 9329.. B M. 10 X 3. 13 III. 1. 9951. B. and end) 3 + 3=6 Nippur C. Fragm. 46 108 A patesi of Kisli.2 X 15. 6. 49 117 Entemena. 9302. + 9690 (both excavated 1890).9623. Nippur 11. 45. 13. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. 7. PI.4 x 4. 86. Two. 9302 : 9. + 2=7 C. M. Fragm.5 x 1.3 X 1. Nippur 2 col. approxitaately 46 110 of Ur-Shulpauddu. fragm. 5. Inscr.8 X 3. 103.4 X 1. Fragm. C. Inscr. No. of a large vase in white calcite stalagmite. Two fragm. 104 Date Same Period. 9 C.2 Fragm. brown tufa (decomposed igneous rock). approximately same place as PI. Nippur li.M. No. M. Nippur li. Description.8. M. of the same vase.

. M. in Recueil XVII. 65 125 Ine-Sin.. + 19 + 32 + 31 + 31 + 30 + 21 =) No. PI. Dungi. col. corner of the S. 30 142 li. ple (Coll.6. Nippur m. Constantinople. Cf. size. 19 (Obv. in M. X 7.2 86.. laser. Rev. Nippur X. Rev. Recent Besearch in Bible Lands. X 4. Dungi Dark gray soap-stone tablet. (identical with that on his bricks). Orig.7 x 8.8X6. C. 14 3. Assyriaca. Fragm. li. B. 601f. 7 col. M. Hilprecht. M. Nippur HI. Orig. 12 2 X 7. reddish 20. 256). Sq. No. Inscr. 52. Door socket III. Bur-Sin II.8. Nippur X. 4 col.4 x 1.5 I-IIt. copied there 1894. The same. 36. 9 (Obv. 20. No. I R. Constantinople (Coll. of a vase B. 9932. below surface.7. and Tlie Dawn of Civilizatimi. Orig. 52 123 1. PI. Inscr. 212). pp. 87-89. rounded. 12 63 Text. 52 122 Ur-Gur. 4. O. Diarbehir. O. Two fragm.5. Obv. size.) +4 (Rev. clay tablet. also Scheil in Recueil XV". Gray soapstone tablet. (part of col. of a baked clay phallus. Nippur li.6. Rev. in M. Ca. largest circumference 14. Inscr. + 15 -f 10 -f 27 -f 35 -f PI. reddish Tello. copied there 1894. O. of a baked clay tablet. 57 126 Bur-Sin II. slightly baked. VII wanting. in coarse-grained diorite. Nippur X. flat. 7X5x2. spots. 9331. in M. 64 .) + 22 56 126 (Rev. Fragm. 8. 65f.5. li.. B. Fragm. 7 col. c. M. III. Fragm. Constantinople. No. B. Constantinople. I of orig. 41 x 25 X 18. X 12. li. ihid. DESCBIPTrON. Rev. flat.. in M. 196 Orig. Obv.5 X 39.3. 19. pp. 32 I. O. 118 Date. Obv. Rev. 10 li. copied there 1893. light brown (glued together). Maspero. Fragm. Baked clay 19. copied there 1893. I wanting. Rifat Bey. 4 (orig. 6)li. VI. 18 =) 126 li. 6 col. 1 m. Obv. 12. Rev. Nippur X. No.. dark brown.. (23 + SO -t- + 22 -f 22 + 25 =) No. Inscr. Dyn. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite. Sq. Hilprecht. 19. of a baked flat.7 W. (?) 50 120 Kaiam-Sin. 2+ 6 -f8-f 8 = 24 XXII. 12i in a black dense trachytic rock. . 9918. 6 C.. 6 I. Rifat Bey..7. 36. 9. 49 FROM NIPPUR. + 15+10=) orig. brown Obv. Scheil.4.3 x 5. Obv. flat. f of 58 127 Gimil (Kat)-Sin. flat. X 1. ConstantinoPI. Copied in Constantinople 1894. 49 119 Sargon I.) =^ 13 C. Rev. underneath the Inscr. Fragm. 51 121 Ur-Gur.1 brown with black Tello. + 23 + 21 + 20 -f 23 1894. x X 3. No.8 X 8.CIIIEFLT Plate.8. approximately same place as PI.5 li. Rev. approximately same place as PI. 6 (Obv. rounded. 3(f. Inscr. 35 X 18. O.1 X 18. x 1.. rounded. of a clay tablet. 22f. of an inscribed bas-relief in basalt. Copied in Constantinople PL flat.7 Nippur III... 5 li. light brown.)=41 pp. C. I. Obv. rounded. Obv. rounded.1X2. . h. 86. pp. M. 86. The same. Cf.6 X 1. Inscr. above the surface of the plain. E. Inscr.) =8 53 124 11. 62-64. li. size. of Kish. pp. rounded. 58 128 Rim-Aku. (21 157 Orig.9 tablet. pp. Cf. 17 li. I. 36. size. . 54 124 Dungi. f of orig. I.) + 2 (Rev. (parts of col.' buttress of Z. found out of place in the rubbish at the foot of a mound. f of orig. approximately same place as PI.

Inscr. 61 137 Nazi-Maruttash. Two fragm. Constantinople. To the same axe belongs the follow. Constantinople.. first x 10. 600 B. 8. Fragm.5. 4 Orig. 2. 129 Date.. of I. in M. 8. 4. 8. 2. unknown. Ca. brown. of 5 li.2. in 5.95 x 1. debris on the slope of a moiiud. traces of second and third 60 130 Cassite col.4. d.. Descriptiok. of an agate cameo.. 0. one hand across the top. 6 (Obv. of a slab in white marble with reddish veins. 2. Seal cylinder in white chalcedony. 8. Hllprecht. I. Fragm.. Seal and (Handbook No.) = 12 Nippur X. (C. same place as M. O. X (. No. Fragm. Nippur III. A bearded standing figure in a long robe. 1895).3. x 1. Constantinople. li. same place as PI.). Mus. No.. length 3. (I. copied there 61 139 Cassite Dyn. 391. sent din hurdsi datn-kar= "10 this standard shekels. copied there 1893. 15. in M. I. Inscr. Assyriaca. same place as PI.64 Plate.4 x 1. Ammizaduga. 6 + 5=11 li.1. 3 li.75 15. same place as PI.8 x 3.8.. Nippur X.1.6 Obv. 2 col..8 15. 6. 9794).5 X 21 X 6. and third Semitic Babylonian in Neo-Babylonidn script. Constantinople. copied there 1893. O. Orig. .75 luser. ders Cf. X 1.. Oiig. of an agate cameo. of the sau. B. in M. O. 60 133 Kurigalzu. copied there 1893. Dyn. 12 of the Metropol. 7 li. Orig. NipOrig.8. 59 OLD BABTLONIAIf INSCRIPTIONS Text. Oi»gir£n-lil. 2500 B. Inscr. Pencil rubbing. 1893. No. of an axe in imitation Nippur III.7. No. 3.N'o. in Nippur III.) +6 (llev. found in the loose summit (1895). 3 li. 93. M. [A-naY''^Nusku be-R-sIm 3.65 x 0..25 x 1-5. 60 131 c. in li. X 4. 1. 3 col. 2. of a clay tablet. in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Agate cameo. Nip)pur III.C. Fragm. G.9 complete. of inscr. 24. M. Brown hematite weight. lapis lazuli.breast. O. note. gold standard of 1 merchants " according to mana= 513 gr. O. 86. i-lkil-ish) erased in order to use the material.3..June. Grig. [Ka-dasli-manl- Tur-gu 4. Nippur III. same place as PI. 1. x 0. (1. Inscr. 3 li.. 8. ellipsoidal and symmetrical. New Cylin- York. 15. Constantinople. 15.. slightly baked.e axe. 85. X shiklu Sq. Fragm. No. 2. 15. Nippur III. Fragm. . 8.6 X li. li. Grig. I. Inscr. Sumerian in Old Babylonian characters. Constantinople. 9 from the ruins. 1. col. PI.5 grams. The tablet was written c. sent from the ruins. A border line at the Impression on gulta percha (in possession of the editor). weight Inscr. p. hole bored parallel with the pur III. 61 138 [ Kadashman ] -Turgu Lapis lazuli disc. 60 132 Burnaburiash. 36. 61 136 [Nazi]-Maruttash. badly damaged. Eev.). I. the other lifted. I.C. Nippur 2. I. 3 2 x 3. Constantinople. Inscr. 3. and near to its Inscr. No. No. Orig. . Inscr. M. O. of a lapis lazuli disc. 61 1S5 Kurigalzu. a-[na ha^-l la-(i-sh]u Grig. 61 134 lKu]rigalzu.2 x 3. d. copied there 1893. No. same place as PI. 11. middle col. in M. in M. other Oriental Seals Ward. length 7. Constantinople. I. place Babyhmia. approximately same place as PI. copied there 1893.

Constantinople. rounded. Upper Turtle (on the top of the stone) scorpion. in Bliss's book. copied there 1893. M. 63 146 Nippur X. orig. pp. 5. same place as PI.. Nos... 8. pp. Orig. I. J>ingirEn-lil. pp. 16. flat M 147 c. 2. 163-165.3.) +2 (lower edge) li. Pa.CIITEFLT Platb. O. Place unknown..8. note 4. ibid. Fragm. 214-219. Six fragm. Nippur III. disc . 140 Date. p. light 64 148 Marduk-shabikzerim. dark brown. li. . in M.. 68 . in M. Plan of an estate. PI. as PI.2 X 0. Inscr. p. 65 Text. Tell el-Hesy (Palestine). animal rampant. rounded. C. Cf. same place as PI. 48.. Orig.4 X 0. 62 145 Cassite Dyn. 2. 236f. copied there 1893. ^"sr'''Nin-lil. Scheil in Recueil XVI. found by F. 61 FROM STTPPUR. . 184-187. Venus (all in the first row below) 2 animal heads with long necks similar to (cf. Orig. pp. O. 44. : Figures facing the right. I. 15.. flat. CassiteDyn. 1892. Orig. pp. Inser. 1). 7. III. 65 149 Marduk-alie-irba.. of an unbaked clay tablet. 61 143 CassiteDyn. VIII.. 15.2 x 0. No. upper left corner wanting. B.C. Cf. PI. with an animal resting alongside (sim- . of fragm. 16 + 22 + 1 . also Jastrow. Boundary stone section in grajish limestone. Rev.5 x 24. in M. 39 in + 40 + 43 + 15=137 X 5. brown (glued together) Obv. 3. Lapis lazuli disc. No. Philadelphia. sect. E..15 x 2.. 11 (Obv. copied there 1893. in 61 M. copied there 1893. VIII.1 of a lapis lazuli tablet the material of which had been used. 62 144 Cassite Dyn. 8. Constantinople. 57. I. Loftus. Descbiptiow. No. I. baked clay cylinder. of a slightly baked clay tablet. Rev.2. l^apis lazuli disc. of the sun.. dark brown.. nearly flat. 15. at the centre c. dark brown. 57. XXIV. Conder. 1. I. O. of a light black stone tablet. pp. Knudtzon. Inscr. Travels and Besearches.. Nippur X.35. Orig. 116-120.8.15. 52-60 Sayce. No. Inscr. in X 4.. 130-134 (worthless!). O. 3 II. Constantinople. flat. Unbaked 6. Bliss. meaning of characters unknown. 1. Rev. same place as PI. Inscr. . copied there 1893. and Part I of the present work.15. 2 (orig. Orig. X Nippur I. Hil- precht. 1400 B. copied there 1894. 1. 61 142 Cassite Dyn. solid. 4. Inscr.75 X pp. IV. XXIV. (?) Tragm.15 clay tablet. 8. the top c. I. quarter of City III. bird on a post. 66. also Bliss. 67 A Mound of Many Cities. uninscribed. Constantinople. Plan of an estate. Probably used as a charm.5. 141 CassiteDyn. at the N. M.6. (margin)= 39 A.Jr.5x10. at brown . sect.5X3. ibid.9 X 1. in Z. d. Talcott Williams. O. barrel shaped. in M. Cf. 15. Obv.2 li. Rev. Orig.. 4) col. 7. Obv. nearly Rev. place unknown.5 X 18. on May 14. crescent. 4col. J. Nippur X. Constantinople. Fragm.. fig.. nearly on both sides. 137f.) + 1 (upper edge) +1 (left edge) = 23 irregularly written.. No. Orig.. h. The Aniarna of a Tablets. 2. object V R. Constantinople. Babylonia. Remnant 2. Cf.8X6X2. O. VI. Obv.. 8. rounded. Nippur III. 5135. 36f. Scheil in Recueil Tell XV. Obv. M. Cassite Dyn. same place. pp. 301-325. Nippur III.98. irregular. copied there 1893. O. V R. +11 (Rev.. Constantinople. in possession of Dr. pp. Baked clay tablet. 5.

The same. li. Babylon.). PI. object similar to without animal (below the 2 animal heads). similar to V R. No. B. below surface under the rooms of T. heflndlichen) Vorderasiatischen Altertumer und Oipsabgusse. 43. impure bluish gray limestone. in the Koyal Museums. 57. No. 213. continued. 1).. B. sect. Inscr. Inscr. B.2 X 18. 10060. 69 151 Fragm. of a baked brick from the outer course of a column. M. found out of place. offering a libation. Orig. f of orig. Assyriaca. but Lower section A : V R. (written 70 152 Nebuchadrezzar II. in M. 10 m. 4 (orig. size. PI. sect. ilar to Description. Constantinople. the other holding a stick in his right hand. Two fragm. Pho. Constantinople.7.. X 7. pp.. 2 col. 57. II.6 x 3. seated figure. M. continued.5. 5. Nippur.6 I. not : debris far fill- below Upper section and section A naked worshiper standing The god draw before a seated god left. Nippur. OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS Date. 33 X 38 X 20. O. Constantinople. 6. Votive tablet in XVI 37 Ur-Enlil.). 3 col. Sq. (Ur-Enlil) standing before a seated god and cised) worshiper offering a libation. 4934). fig. large snake. 57. Sq. last object.3 x 6. sect. figures incised. XVI 38 Same Period. E. 1). Upper part of a black boundary stone. side of Z. p. fig. 29 X 21 X 19. 22. No. Hilprecht. 68 1100 B. 11 li.5 (fragm.) X 35 (orig. 94. Text.) brick. 14. partly covered with bitumen. in private posses- Inscr. Eecueil XVI. of the hole 1 . taken from a sq. Orig. Fragm. S. I. 6 Cf. V R. Same group reverfed on the left. of a votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone. Nippur III. Pho.3 (fragm. size. p. Cf. Inscr. 8 V) li. on the edge) 15 x 6. Cf. Orig. 6. 8 + 8 + 8 = 24 li. li. Unhewn block of white calcite stalagmite. 69. W. C. x 8. Lower section : A goat and a sheep followed by two men.66 Plate. in the the rooms of T. also Verzeichniss der (in den Kiiniglichen Musien zu Berlin Esarhaddon. The same. yellowish. M. § of orig. : reversed on the Lower A gazel to walking by a bush (or nibbling liis at it ?). same object without animal (all in the second row below) . O. XVII 89 Lugal-kigub-nidudu. Orig. . one carrying a vessel on his head. PI. Alu Hahba. 66. c. Between Upper section: A the figures 4 li. Marduk-ahe-irba. 32f. c. PI. Berlin.) X 8 (orig. 33. botli hands lifted (cf. (C. size. 17. 3.2 (fragm. ing one of surface. Ca. (written on -tlie outer surface) 33. Photograph (half-tone) Eepkoductions. 3 col. of inscr. | of orig. 10. figures and inscrip- naked (uncircumtion incised. sect.C. Nipon the pier III. 57. but reversed. to the S. C.. d.. of a baked 18.2 (orig. Scheil in 66 67 149 149 150 Marduk-alic-irba. of Z. round hole in the centre.. taken from a ca. Inscr. object V R. 22 + 23 + 11= 56 sion. + 6 = 12 XXV.) X 9. a hunter about bow at her. PI. in M.

XXV 69 c. in M. 37 with others) the text on Plates C. buttress of Z. Upper part inscr. Tell eUHesy (Palestine). B. XXiV 68 Marduk-shabik-zerim. 18. Plates 38-42. 9637. B.C. Fragm.) of baked clay. M. : CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUB. No. B. 11-13 and the whole of 11. on S. found out of place on the 36. 9. Cf. III. 2 col. 9312. (C.5 (fragm. Cf. X 8 (orig.. 64.6. PI. bracelets hair. wearing a conical head-dress. 9914 + 9910 + 9915 + 9913 + 9320. 10 X 15 X 7. (written) 3 (orig. approximately same place as PI. of a baked clay cylinder. 1100 B. long pointed beard. 9700. Inscr. Nippur m. Lower section 2 col. broken. M. No. Orig. 86. Pho. Pho. XXIV 66. 9900. 13 li. 31 III. from a ca. Cf. crescent. XXII 64 Naratn-Sin. Pho. clad in a hairy garment. XIX 49-61 Lugalzaggisi. light brown. 36. 23. Lugal-kigub-nidudu. 64. Fragm. 67 c.. Brick of baked clay. possibly " f of a mine + 15 " = 55 m. 86. 4. side of Z. (in possession of the editor). No. Nippur III. E. Plate. Venus. in M. of a black boundary stone. Part of upper arm and both legs wanting. and Eev. 07 Desckiption. left on both wrists. 40-18 Date. XXI 63 Sargon I. Shar repeated on the upper Orig. 4-12. Hair arranged in a net. Orig. 147. Place unknown. Plates 36. A god standing on the right. in white calcite stalagmite. 10001. Text. side of Z. 3. 9685. 9683.20. c. 120. 150. Brown sandstone 2i pebble (weight?). of vases pur. taken from a ca. 10) broken from its side.. 9634. has been restored. 68.. 1400 B. Cf. Cf. No. below surface underneath the beginning at the bottom..7 X 6. 50. S. of a brick (fragm. 9603. No. tiiken from a ca. 9087. XXV 70 Unknown. Inscr. yellowish. in corner of inscribed surface. 13 li. E. short staff (V) in each hand. weight 1067 grams. from which (together with others) the text on Plates 38-42 has been restored.M. Meaning of characters inscribed on convex surface not certain. Constantinople. from which (together Nip- M. E. M. 37. 37. shekels (equal to c. in white calcite stalagmite. I. taken PI. flat on both ends. O. I. 9611 + X + 9610. No. Tablet of baked clay.. Constantinople. (in possession of the editor). 9925. Nippur li. 5 and Nos. 9613. PI. B. 6 li. 36. + XX 63 Al-usbarshld. PI. Constantinople.4 Inscr. 9607 + 9657 + 9609. 87. Nippur. Diafbekir. 9628. XXIII 65 Ur-Ninib. 9695. 9696 Cf. of Pho. oblong. Obv. Nippur. No. 22. according to . PI. an inscribed portion (containing parts of 11. O. 86. No. 1054 grams.).1 gr.. left The character 3.2 x 14. 10. Fragm. Ill.. of an inscribed bas-relief in basalt. Upper : section Disc of the sun. No.). taken from a ca. M. light brown. taken from a ca. XVIII Fragm. 148. below surface. 8. of vases C. approximately at the same depth as PI. PI. barrel shaped. I. White marble vase. Pho. 8.C. 9479).'if referring to tlie Babylonian heavy silver mine [royal norm = 1146. (written) X 10. from a pavement constructed by Ur-Ninib. PI. B. Cf. No. O.) X 18 S. Cf PI.6 X 5. (C. 9692. 9793). Fragm. Nippur. Cf..1-1150. (C. No. solid. 9553). 9605..

d.C. 38. X 17 X 3. taken from an immense heap of excavated earth to the E. 10049. deep) traces of five Aramaic letters. is View taken from inside the drain. W. 63. upper corner and part of lower corner wanting. M. laid in clay mortar. B. 14. rise 33. fringed coat. left XXVI 71 c. The lion. 206]). corner of Ur-Gur's Z. left side broken in M. 9477). Lehmaiin in Actes du Jmitieme congres international des p. Arch of baked brick. sleeveless. flat Bricks convex on one side. Constantinople. clutching the enemy with bis fore paws and burying left foot the man's left shoulder. stage of Ur-Gur's Z. Bas-relief in baked brown. 5.C.7. M. III. XXVII 72 At least 4000 B. Nippur m. fa9ade Nippur of the A section of the drain which surrounded Z.D. orien- talists. C. at the same time in defense raising his left arm against the sides of his lion's bead. h. stands on bis hind legs.. span 51. NIPPCJE. 1889. He is thrusting his sword into the flank of a lion. B.5. Orig.68 Plate Text. XVI. Nippur III. 7 m. Nippur III. Terra-cotta vase with rope pattern. first XXIX 74 Ur-Gur. General and distant view of the excavations at T.C. XXVIII 73 At least 4GO0 B. at the top 53. Semitic section B. Description.'I. . an III. at the orifice of an open drain c. his left bis neck. Nippur III. (C. h. on the other. below the E.3 same place as PI. below the E.. foundation of UrGur's Z. N.49 Arab on each side . seen at the bottom of the trench. 350 B. 71. Front of arch opened to let light pass through. tail Pait of man's and of lion's and left hind leg wanting. taken from a ca. Bearded man With a conical bead-dress and mass of locks falling over a short. having received a wound his teeth in over his right foreleg. tight. Pho. Man figliling a approximately lion. clad in knee resting on the ground.6 off. No. clay. in upright position as found in trench. XXX 75 1894 A. of Z. OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS OHIKFLY FKOM Date. O. On right side of plinth (0.

.

.

.

.

9607. 9643. of mu-aG. 9634).9902. (9633.rihe fuiyut to : erttsv. J : Tin: !«. ) 9605 9599. . /^ " 11 : 959H 9679. 9608.9903. 9903 9581 9581. 9605.9633. 9679. // :0. 99OT. 9607).3 . W^ 959' 9679 12 : ibid. I r^ 9680 9605 ^^_i^ 9: ibid.. 9904. N. '3 X 13: 9591. Am. 9643 . <=0 ^ 958.9608. 3 on a*r-. loooi. L. XVIII. 9599. 9643. 9703).« — « Trans. 15. Phil.. 8: 9643. 9657 •" forms 9903 1.9608 J. 9643.(9901. 9632. 9608. (9902. •3 ^„„.9902). 9679 (9633. 9680. (9905. 9605. (9633^- 14. 9632)- ^< ^*J_^^ 4: 9609+9607. »=—^ ^-_ 2: ibid. 9703). Soe. 9905). F>1 i( (9905)- 9643 7 : 9609. >)^l> » 9903 9632. % 5: 9609-1^9607. 3: 9657 • 9607 9609. 9608). 9605. 3. (9633. tiro lines druivii by iiii.r-.9581. PL S6 86 ': 9657-9607.. 9657. 9591.9581+9643. (9902. 990. S. '4' j( 9904)- ^fl 959. 9680. 9680). (96S0. TOOOI. '9633) Xoti:»L. — i 1.9903. (9605.. (9903.f. 9581. 9608. 6: 9643 9609+9607. 9605. 9591. 9599. ^ 9634. loooi.itnkf IJf Eriuiu-e.

.

f. 9606. 6 f. • e. 1. 9627. 9630 '^ 'm 9630 '/'•W'V f"fe»'g^ «/ ? ^ "^^ 9630 J. (9635). N. of 3-1 restor. 37 86 Cniifiniicd 9904 9900 1. (9604). e- . : 9604.. 10 9 f- j: r. 9639. : (9607). e. 9917)- 2 f. : 9606. 9904. for 1. I f. e."^' 6 f. 9630. 9644. 9639). for 16 cf. i. e. 1 1 f. (9604). : 9635^ 9620. e. 10 f. . beginii. 8. C. also 99C». (9631. e. Phil. e. e.9606. : (9917. 9634. 16-17: 1. 9917 9639)- 4-1 f. 9620. e. . 9606. : 9604. loooi. e.^4^^J^ 5 f. 9627..--< =^^9635 9 . /p^ ) ctq^ 8 f. Soe. PI.: 9635. (9630. It. .--x gi^i^ 9627 7(.S f. XVIII. Am. from 4 cf. i. 1. c. e. Seofritl llneti miiifiiiy.Trans. S. 9631. : 9620-9627 9627 i^MPH 7 9635.

.

9660. L. 9610. (9300). 9654. 9906. L. Phil. 965949319). 9319)- L. 9659. 9300 '/L 9300 NOTE. 9642.9642. 20: 9317. 9317. 9300 * Omit. 24 L. (9659). 9307. 9300. L. 23 : L. 9587). 9915. 9645. 17]. 9911+9651. (9583. L. 9645. 9642. 8-9 : Ibidem. 9674. 9318. COL. 9702. '9307. 961 (9313). 36 : 9317. (9628. 9651. (9692. 30 : 9301. 9923). 7: 8615. L. . L. 9307). (9689). 9692. o-^n 9674 has 3. 96604 9659. 5: 8614. 96594 9660. L. 13 : L. (9313. 9906). I. 21 : : 9317. 11 : 9696. <^<. 28: 9584 r93i5. (9912-i 9658. 9696 - 9637. 9702. 9583. 9660. 9689). 9906. L. 9700). 9317. 9637. li. 9660 ~~ /. L. — The 1. 9906. 9628. 91 15 J 9913. L. 9610. r'ot . I..'?r/ <f <^ •^"— . 9656). 9318. 9584 J 9315. 9315. 9906). (9300). 9587). 9628. (9317. (9300. 9301. L. 9689.1 : Trans. 1 1 . 9906. L.} ' t 9642 ¥ ^B y>^ II )\ 3^. 9318. Am. (9689.8615.17)- L. 9645. 9654. (9913. 9317 9660. N. 9301 )• 27: 9317. [written on £. 9654 has TWlf 9646 has 5 perpendicular li. in. 9583.9611. 96. 9645. 23 : 9317. (9692. 9659. 8. 14 9642. I . 9906. I 9660 7^ 9906 ^ 1. (9659. 18: 9318. L. Soc. 8614. L. 9646. 9583. (9912-9658.966o. . 9584 f93i5. 17: 9318.-9659). 9642. 9907). L.is 87 Col. 9301. L. 19: 9318. 9317. 9654. 9642. 8614 has 4 aiigul. (9584. 9300. L. 9645. 9642). 9307. 9645. 9913.9923). (9642. 16 : 9642. 9659. 9700). 9584 f 9315. 9300.. 4: 8614. L. 9317. 8615.9646. 25 : 9317. 9674. 9906). 9317. 9642. frr. 9656. 9659 T L. (9587). a: 8614. 9651. 6: 8615. 12 : 9674.9913. /v * <H^1Sl =f= ] L- 9642 ^ ^^i^^ <J>1] -y *^B# . 9300. L. (9587). L.8615. 9654. 8615. 9689. 9921 +9313. above text has been restored from the following fragments. L. 10 : 3: 8614. J< 8614 this Only 8615 has oblique li. 9583.(9674. L. 31 : 9301.9674. 32: 9301. 9654. if^ W2S?j^ "f=K* 8614 9913 9610 /c* 9692 '3 ^1^ 4: 9692 /v 9660. 9654. 9660. XVllI. 29:9584+9315. 99124 965S. 9301. 9660. on 9317 9317. 9913. (9662. (9689. L. L. 9911. 9317. (9692.9662. S. 9662. 15 : 9642. L.

.

'til 9625. 8614 has 4 angul. 9915. 9624.9687. 9619. 8614. 9642. (9905. N. 9913. 9306 [col. 9642. 9646 [col. 3: 9921. 96624 9665. L. 8615). 33'. L.8615.9638). L. (9905.96741. 17: 9624.^(y «H ^ 9921. 9905. 4: 9913. 39 87 donihiucd Col.(9695. 14: 9905. 3: 9921 L. Fl. (9695. 7: 9313. ^D 9301 <^*^ 9695 9304 •9304 has 3. 9903 9619 HH 9903 resp. (9611. 9921. L.1 : 1 Trans. L. 9673. 9671). 9301. 9598). 9313 [col. 9921 ' (^ 9913 *P=»> 9903. L.9646.is li. 9683. 8 L. 9907 each <> II 4 . (9318. 8614. 9306. 5: 9913. II begins]. (9908. L. 9645). 9922. L. 1 Mti^^^^]te 3'^^^ '^hr4) ^ <>l=0 pz{> resp. 9646 9625 9646 8614 <h^^A=iffl TLD-^ <i> II ^g^ ^ < P-^ ^ <^ re. 9313. 9701. . 9701. 86j4 L. (9907. 9306. re. 9304. J I.// ffl 95 'o. I 8614. 9662). 011 follow. 9667. 9313). 9667. ^^x Same Illllll varr. 9624). 9674. Col. 15: 9305 [col. 9646). 9683). 9625 ->•• i^>»i> 9598. 9306.9598. 40. L. L. 8615). re.(9642. resp. 9611. 9015 f=<l f>»»> /" « 9.9683. 9306. (9671. |/r^#^ii 9304. 9673.8614. 9658. 9695). t II begins]. 9665. L.9625. (9306). 9665. S. 9903. (9318). 9638. (9306). li ^-H-VgD=q^ 1=1:3 ^ /> 11 ii n li.9306. (9921. (9905.(9611. L.9304. 9305. re. 9921. L. 40: 8614. 99!5. 9662 - 9665. 9625. 9642. 39: 8614. (9914. (9695. L. 9667)- L. 9905.13: 9687. 9674.9625 <irfniF^ 9301. 9921. 9913. 9915 9910. 1: 9913. 12: 9611. 9921. 45: 9619. 6: 9913. II begins]. Col. il. 9667. 9611. L. 9318. (9667). 43: 9619. 9915' Ip--^ 9915. re.9638. r6: 9305. 9673. 35: 9301. . L.9306. 36: 9301. 9903.(9595. 9913. (9903. re. 9304. resp. 961 964 9683.ont. 9695). (9300).9695. 9903. L.8614. "on 91 13 the last 9625 sign omitted 93 J8 99i3> re. re. II begins]. 9313. 9658. 9306. 9642. 9310 [col.10 m // <^^ 7r. 41 : L. 9913. L.iV horii'. 9914^ 991°. 42: 9304. 9667. 9642 <> < / u Varr. (9914. 9905)- L. L. 9683. (9673. 9662). (9667.9914). (9318). P ^-4—^ 9313 I ' 9313. 9610. 93io)- 44: 9619. L. 992i)- L. 9673. 9658. 34: 9301. 9642. 9667. 9625.9304. Phil. I ends]. 9619. 9642. ends]. 9903. 10: 9611. 9301. 1. plate L. 9662. resp.9905). Am. If. 9921 <>^ II . L. F<J>3|-^l!>Slll 35 .9687. (9598.9922). 93'3. L. 9658. Soe. 9304. (9922).sp. 9301. 9907. 9: 9611 [col.9907. 3. 9913. (96S3.9625. 37 : 8614. 11: 961 9642. (9683. II begins]. 9300. 9662 |! /'5. 9304 Co/. 9671. [col. 9915 9910.9646. L. 9313.9907.99it> ^T L ^1 9662.9674. 46: ^ 9921. 9304). 9598. 9903. I. 38: S614. XVIII.

.

40 87 Co)din>te<( Col. 9665. S. PI. (9914. 9667). 9907. pi. 9307. 9316. 9316. 9309). 38 : 9307. 11. 9307). L. on follow. I 9305 9305. 14 X 9611. 9656. L. 9314 eight perpend. 9673). 9307. 9685. 9625 Varr. 9922 lIQfBi •//. 9665. 9315. i-'-p. ^ p^ * ?3>='<^ ™i ji ^ |>^ 31 R^ 93. 9314.9320. 9913 - 9320. 9922). 9651. 9928). 9665. IT. 20]. 93'5. i6. 25: 9300. 9907. 9314. 8614. 9914. 20: 96:0. . (9668). 9916 9316. (9903. 9654. 9300. 966019319. 28: 9319. 34 : 9307. 9300. (9624). L. 9663. 9314 t 9316. • 9319 six angul. 9319. 9925). 8614. 31 : 9659-9319. (9310. <^#. 9309.9922). 9625). L. 9665. L. N. 9907. 9654. L. 9656. (9625. 18: 9610. 9922. Phil. 41 : 9914..?7. 9305. L. 9314. 9668. (9309> 9315.9316. 9659. 9319. 8614. (9922. L. 35 37: : 9307. 8614. (9310 [col. II li. 9659 r 9319. (9317. 9659^9319. Ill begins]. L.n^ 7^^ "^^^->^>?l ^ * ^ n<i> ^/=tJ ^-^93: 9314. (9307. 8614. 9314. 9656. 9654. 9308. 19: 9610. 9610. 3. L. 9312. Am. 9625. 30 : 9319. ^ II ^ 40 pjl #^^ fO ^V # 9654. 9307. 44 : 9673. L. 9665. (9651. 9300. 9317. Soe. 9317)- L. 8614). ^KnF^I^ll /g^i. 9659-+ 9319. 9314. (9651. 9928. 96594 9319. 9319 i&- 1^8614 3% Same 'text van-. 43 99144 9320. 9668).. (9646. 9663).9320.(9310). 8614. 39 : 9914. 9663). L. 26 9300. 9314). 9925). 9667). (9663. 24 : 9300. L. L. 9665 9656 <H=ii'> 45 ^7. 42 : 9914. 32: 9307. 86 1 4. 46: 9915 99104 9320.' : Trans. Ill begins]. 9651. 9307.^|I^ 9319 c ^ 9319 9300 has five. cf. 9659 9305 I 9300 96S5 »> ^5 «•— 9651 ^ t=ca 25 ^ # F^»» ^M^ ->H <^3 9319 9663 /^3 . 9624. 9312. L. I 96604 9319.8614. 21 : 9610. 9307. 9317. 27: 9319.9 I 9610 /H 9305 '9 s ^o. 9305. 9309). 40 : 8614 [col. 9315. 9312. 9654. 9671 15 ^r^d^ I Col. * L. XVIII. >^>l Hj '>3i7. : 23 : 9300. (9309. 9300. 9314. L. (9928). ML : 9913. 9314. 9925). 1 : L. 9307. 9314 9316. 9650. 8614. 9300. 36: 9659- 9319. I. 9665. S614. L. 9317 ^^'^ 9319 has seven. 9654)(9907. 33: 9307. Col. 9314)- L. 45: 9915-79910^9320. L. (9315. 9660-.X - 9310. as I. L. 9922. 9660. 34 and margin) 9665 iO =t>F\F=r<}=i *B 9312 < 'ol. (9305. L. (9319. 29 : 9319. 9660^ 9319. 9319 9319 S5 II <> 9319 9319 16 ^^ between Ml and Ni on 9905 |j<^FB-»4 20 IZj '7 K. 9305. L. 9308). 9660. 9300 [includes the first three characters pf L. 9308). 9315. 9903. 9317. 8614. 9610). (93:7. L. L.?3'4> re. 2 : 9910+9914. (9b6o. 9319. 9307. 9317). (9317. re. li. (9317. L. 9925)- L. 9300. 9315. 22: L. HI. 9309. 3'. 9659+9319.9316.9320. 9305. 9319. (9309. 9654. 9685. (9922. 9314. 9667. (9654.

.

9651. 9924). 16: 9308. L. (9913. 9663. 9913. 9624). L. 9619). 9666.9 9903 3 6 < 9913 10 ^h^:* I . 9926). f' X. L.-o n^^pq^ / 9305 9316 9624 28 6t •^1^9316. 24: 9666. 23 9666. 9319. (9928. 9619). 9924). : 9308. L. : L. 9924). (9671.9313). (9313. 9663. 9610). Vol. 9929. 9665. L. (9665. 9928. 19624. L. 19 L. N. 9928). /d w\ ^^K S6I4 ^^^^ 20 '^F<3-<^ J< 9922 9660 V^H F^^£3. L. 9663). 9310. 8 : (9304. 9927. 99^4)- 9666. 9311. (9671. 14:9308. 9907. 17: 9308. 8614 O-. 25: (9666. resp. 7 9903. (9924. (9698). 9319. li. 9927. PL 41 87 Coidhmed Vol. 9903. 27 : 9309-i 9924. II ends]. 3i L. 9309^ x- 9924. in. 20 : : 9666. (9665).: Trans. 9308. L. L. 9927. 24 9670 9310. 9319 ^ir 9651 P=fr}> 'Varr. 9313). (9668. (9665. (9927. 9319. (9663. 9319 follow. 9671. 9668 9929 21 ^ resp. (9309+9924. 33 9305. 9926. 9663. 9924). 13:9308. Phil. 9304). 9305. 9601. Am. 13: 9308. 9624). 32 : 96014 9305. L.i| J'' 9309. 6: L. 9929). 4: 9903. 9929. . 9601. 9304. 9670. L. 9670. resp. 9312. L. 9913. 9697. 9 : L. L. 9671. 26 : 9305. 9309. ^^h?aK ^ ^ •=! :-)H4]<fc=< ^W^rcsp. : L. L. 9663. 9673 1^ p^/[j 26 ^7 V 9670 9924 . L. pi. 5: 9903. (9671. {9926. (9928. L. 9913. on L. L. 9619. 29: 9319. 9903. 9928). 9305 [col. 9928 GP *^r-7^ |^Hir. 11: 9308. 3: 9916+9316. (9309+ L. 9651. 30: L. S.(9308. resp. . III. 15: 9308. 9926. XVIII. <3(>io). 9304). 9668. 31 : : 9601. 9916). 9924). 9670 9670 93 '4 8614 43 9646 "^T^^^ ^gx^-^ mil \ Hill ^^^ ^3 I 9670 A 14 i Q022 jp^ £7 resp. 93C9+9311. 9309. (9929. 28 9601.f</^^Qffi •iO #iiS>i^i> ^9 ji • < 9619 9619 %\\ ^^u> la io 3 'T —^ I 9601 9697 ^i « 3 perpend. 10 9304. L. (9668). 9924). 9924). 9309-rx-9924> 9624. 22: L. 18: 9308. 9307). (9697. 9307).9619. L. Soc. 9312. on 9651 "^W^ ff^K:-#aiiO >HhlHlli. 9670. L. 9319. 9670. (9665. 9319. 9638. (9304. 9903. L. 9601. 9670. (9666. (9928.

.

S. S614).93". 9305. r/f H 1^^9602 7^ 9314^931649311 9319 ">• on 9923 ^9316. 9319. 9319 ^^ i 9320 89 L. 36 9305. (93'°. omitted • ' 9310. '\ J^ Ill. 9314+9316 93". • 9663 fMlfr<|=^: « <j 3 3 9665. (9307). 9307. . 9602.L. 93'4-t 9316^9311-9923.3 V 9305 -^l—^ 9305 j^ 35. 37 : 9305. Am. XVII PI. L. '\rZjU// 9665. 931649923. Ill ends].) L. . 40: 9305. L. A2 87 (Juntinited Col. 9602. 9319 m 93 '9 ^^^^^ ^^ H^r^ ' ^|^96ox+9305 U la JS. N. 9307. 9319. L. in. 9310. 93T0. resp. 8614 [col. 9320. 93?9. 9319.9311.93i9 131^9602 —™ 9319 9311 :^93i9 ^9311 ^V 9305 ^3>(\ l^TK. 93i9.9602 'CJ ^9319 H'^^eoo l^^r 9602 11 9319. 93i4^93>6. 9319. Phil. (9665. 9601 .35.34: j : 9602. (9320). 9316. 9305. 9316-9923. 9310. 9319. Col. 3 I 9305 ^rH93o5 9602 \ ' LLJ9319 o3n5 'T^93". re. 9602. Soc. 93".9305 a i/^H^ ^ VurianU confiit ued. 38 9305. L. 9316+9311. 9305. 39: 9305. 9307).: Trans. (9602. 9602.

.

94 . S.t oil the b(uti» of No. N. Soc.<fiiji:<9> !"J#^--f> Nimiberiuij of liiu.Trans. Am. 91. XVIII. S. fl. Phil.m 91 '.

.

S. N. Phil. Pl.U t5 Q5 .Trans. Soc. 8. Am. XVUI.

.

KcrUm. Numberhnj of linrx on th^ CJ. /!//«/• a break i>f nevera/ liiieft PL 46 No. XoK J04 and 106. Phil. haMx of No. miMakt of . Am. S. No lOH . XVIII.1. Wo. Jos and 204. Read ^•''Vl\ NA. 10 Numbering of linen on the ba>tu< of No. PL Vy 103 Mistake of iserib^ * Ob/lijKf Hi. 3. N. Soc. nOfoUowK Cf.Trans. Erasure of ncribf.

.

PI 46 . N. Am. 8.Trans. Soe.. S. XVIIl. Phil.

.

Phil. PI. Soc. N. XVIII. 47 . 8. Am.Trans. S.

.

Am. yv. Soc. S. Phil. N.Trans. 4^ lO So . S. XVIII.

.

S. Phil. Am.9 05 CO . N. Soc.Trans. XVIII. 3. 4. PI.

.

S. N. Soc. Am. 50 . PI. XVllI. Phil.Trans. 8.

.

51. Phil.Trans. An-. Soc. XVIU. S. N. 121 ^^^!f fM^ M^ I El 4P=JF^^B> III >7 f JJL27 ^- 10 T^ *v .. 8. PI.

.

yffzr^-g> . ^^^HH^ N§ ^ >ffr. Am. Phil. Reveme. XVIII. S. Soc N.Trans. 8. PL 52. 123 Ob»er«e.

.

S. Soc. 8. XVIII. Am.Trans. Phil. N. PL 5S .

.

3. XVIII. N. Phil. See..Trans. S. PI 54 . Am.

.

Phil.Trans. S.VI PL 55 ^ IS . Soc N. Am. X.

.

Soc. IV. Col. Col. N. Col. XVIII. CnL J I. VII JO 16 30 Ji5 SO . III. 0. I. Col V. Col. Phil. PL 56 J> 126 Ohvene. Am.Trans. VI Col. S.

.

VII. VI. acnbe.Trar. XVIII. S.s. jn-.. U. 3. Soe. V. Am. 'Co/. Col. Col. U. S. Phil. N. . I. PL 57 Col. 20: Eiwiire of the. 10. G. Col. IV.

.

3.Trans. Soc. Am. S. Phil. N. PL oS J27 Obve Reverse. XVIII. •^ c .

.

Trans. Soe. n. N S.. Am. 8. r. XVIII.9 9^ as . Phil.

.

Am. Fl. XVIII.Tr«ns. 3. S. 60 130 133 132 133 Reverne. Soe.. Phil. m . N.

.

Phil Soc. XVIII.Trans. S. Am. PL 61 134 135 138 136 139 140 141 142 ^ij^ 137 143 . N. 8.

.

Reverse. S XVIII.Trans. PL ea 144 Obverse. . a. Am.. N. 145 Obverse. Reverse. Soe. Phil.

.

Am. eiwiii-e tif S8: Rend -^t— ix the xerlbe. 17: Renil Vol. N. . Soc. 8. Fl.Trans. S. ^ the tr"! the re-'it i^ eruMire of the ncribe. 63 . XVIII.* 146 '('oL III. Ill. Phil.

.

Soc. PL 64 WS 2 =5 1^ £ !? ^ ^ . XVIII. K.Trans. 3. Phil. Am. S.

.

Am.Trans. 8. Phil. N. 10 15 20 . S. XVIII. Soc. PL 65 149 Col I.

.

. Ain. J. Phil. 3. II. ri titi 149 C(f)dimied Col. 21 Col. XVIII. N S. 10 15 ASA. ^^^>JS««^' .Trans. Soo.

.

Phil. N. S. Uj ' < •'- ' ^^>'^ '^ . 8. II. XVIII. Pi. Col. Soc. 67 149 (hidimu'd Col. Am. III.Trans.

.

8. XVIII. 68 . Am.Trans. N. Soc. PI. S. Phil.

.

3: Erasure nf the scribe.TiHiirs. 8. Pi 611 151 V) "L. S. Am Phil. So<- . N. . XVIII.

.

N. 8. Soc. PL 70 >Q .Trans. XVIII. S. Ann. Phil.

.

Phil.Trans. Am. Nippur. Soc. . XVIII. INCISED. XVI VOTIVE TABLETS IN LIMESTONE. PL. S. N. S.

/' X .

S. Phil. . PL.Trans. XVII K MARBLE BLOCK OF LUGALKIGUBN ICUDU. Am. XVIII. Nippur. 3. Soc. N.

.

PL. Nippur. . Phil. S. XVIII. Soc. 3. N.•> VASE FRAGMENTS OP LUGALKIGUBNIDUDU. Am. XVIII to f 3^ : yi-^ \- > -.Trans.

.

Am. 3.Trans. Nippur. S. . XVIII. Soc. N. PL. XIX VASE FRAGMENTS OF LUGALZAGGISI. Phil.

.

Soe. Am. PL. Phil. N. .. XX 62 VASE or ALUSMARSMID (URU-MU-USH]. Nippur. 3.Trans. S. XVIII.

.

Soc. N. I.Trans. XVIII. Phil. . XXI 68 BRICK OF SARGON Nippur. 3. Am. S. PL.

.

Soo. S. Diarbekir. . XXII \ w 5f^:'^n 64 INSCRIBED BAS-RELIEP OF NARAM-SIN. 8. Am.rrans.. XVIII. Phil. N. PL.

.

. N.. Phil. Inscription begins at bottom. Am. Soe.Trans. XXIII BRICK OP UR-NINIB-Nippur. S. 3. PL. XVIII.

.

Soe. Mardukshabikzerim. 68. CLAY TABLET (OBVERSE AND REVERSE). XXIV ^asaaiffSzsfrr-: 66 67 68 66. Am.— Place unknown. S. PL.. Phil. .Trans.-Tell of a barrel-cylinder of el-Mesy. N. 67. 3. XVIII. Pragm.

.

PL. Phil. Am.. S. 70.Trans. Soe. . Fragm. of a Boundary Stone. Inscribed Pebble. XXV \ X \ 68 70 69. N. Nippur. xvni. 3.

.

Nippur. XXVI ^ BAS-KELIET IN **/ 71 CLAY WITH AN ARAMAIC INSCRIPTION. Pliil. 3. PL. S. . N. XVllT. Am.Trans. Sop..

.

liij^lier than tliat of the vase. Am. XXVIl r ^i TERKA COTTA VASE WITH ROPE PATTERN.s. Phil. tlie I .05 63. C— Nippur. Soc. atui nl. 3. Heicjlit. N."^. below eastern fotnuiation of /iggnrrat.yi m. soTitli-cast from an the top of which was c. . S. XVIIl. It stood 7 ni. . 4000 B.49 ni. J-onild in C.. S3 cm. I'r-tiur'. dinnieter at the top. wliich consists rntii tlv of liurntil bricks of Sargon and Narfini-Sin. b*low a pavement altar. PL. 2.s an tiprijjht position .Trans.5 cm..

.

S. l-ruut uf arcli opened to let light pass through. cm. Soc. XVIII. below the foundation of the m. 7 m. N. 4000 B. XXVIII ARCH or BURNED BRICK 71 sante. rise.-Nippur. cm. View taken from iusiUe the drain. Phil. At the and orifice oi 4. 57 . C. c.Trans. helow a pavement which consists entirely of burned bricks of Sargon I and Naruui-Siii. PL. hiyh. an open drain passing nndtr the eastern corner of L'r-Oiir's Xigjjnrrat. Am. C. 33 em. LAID IN CLAY 31 MORTAR. span. 8.

.

Am. ^f. >iVIII. . Phil. g. Soc. S. PL.trans. Nippur. XXIX 74 NORTM-WESTERN FACADE OF THE FIRST STAGE Or UK-GUK'S ZIGGUKRAT.

.

Am. 4— Deep trench extending from the great wall of the temple enclosure to the facade of Ur-Our's Ziggurrat.Trans. S. 7 (9)— Three stairs of the Ziggurrat.-SOUTIi-EAST 1. 3— Causeway built by Ur-Gur. N. after an unsuccessful attempt by the Arabs to take his life. Phil. PL.6 (8).. d. SIDE. XXX r GENERAL VIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS AT THE TEMPLE OP BEL. 2— Kxcavated rooms on the southeast side of the temple and separated from the latter hy a street. XVUI. leading to the entrance of the Ziggurrat. i— Kast corner of Ir-Ciiir's Ziggurrat. . Soe. Haynes in 1S<J4. 5— Modern building erected by Mr.

Related Interests