UC-NRLF

$B EhM

DflM

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in

2007

with funding from

IVIicrosoft

Corporation

http://www.archive.org/details/earlydynastiesofOOgaddrich

THE "EOTHEN"
The

object

original texts

and

SERIES

this

translations, transliterations

series

to

is

translations of texts hitherto unpublished

and essays on the history,

religion, etc., of Western Asia

in English,
tion,

pubHsh

of

and

civilisa-

in

the

earliest times.

-Q^^D-

I.

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF

SUMER AND AKKAD.

By C. J. GADD, B.A., Assistant
ment of Egyptian and Assyrian
the British Museum.

in the Depart"

Antiquities in

In the press.
11.

THE FIRST CAMPAIGN OF

SENNACHERIB.
An

unpublished

text, edited by

SIDNEY SMITH,

M.A., Assistant in the Department of Egyptian

and Assyrian Antiquities

in the British

Museum.

In preparation.

THE BOGHAZ-KEUI TREATIES.

(1)

The Treaty

of

Shuna-asshura, King

Kizzuwadni, with a King of the Hittites.

By SIDNEY SMITH.

of

ffbe Eotbeii

Seriee. l.

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF

SUMER AND AKKAD.

BY

C.

J,

GADD,

B.A..

Assistant in the Department of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities

in the British

Museum.

LONDON

LUZAC &
1921.

CO.

^C^^f

i,y

.rti CA

HARRISON & SONS,

LTD.,

Printers in Ordinary to His Majesty,

t-47,

St. Martin's Lanb,

London, W.C.

a.

NOTE.
The
for

acquisition of a complete

the foundations of

region

well-defined

the

in

and trustworthy scheme

the oldest history of even one

ancient world

no mean

is

who work

addition to science, and perhaps only those

can duly appreciate the fortune of

in less favoured fields

Thanks

the Assyriologist in this important respect.

discoveries

which date almost entirely from the

years, this claim can

now be made with

the early period of

history

essay

is

an attempt to

which seems to afford

last

last

to

ten

confidence for

This short

in Babylonia.

utilise the latest available material,

sufficient

indications to furnish at

an entirely connected scheme of chronology, which

rests,

not

upon

conjecture,

but upon the evidence of

written records, that are, in comparison, almost as old as

Nor must

the events which they commemorate.

forgotten that this

it

be

due, in very great measure, to the

is

good fortune which has attended one particular series of

excavations,

on

since

namely,

on

1888,

those

the

site

which
of

have
the

been

ancient

carried
city

of

Nippur, by the successive expeditions of the University

of

Pennsylvania.

In

connection

with

this

the earliest period of Babylonian chronology

n ^

fr

^''

essay

on

reproduce

NOTE.

Vi

another celebrated text which has not hitherto, owing to

the

circumstances of

careful study that

its

first

appearance, received the

importance warrants, and

its

en passant, certain other

monuments

illustrative

quote,

of this

early period.

My

thanks

are

offered,

firstly,

to the

for permission

secondly,

to

to
Sir

due,

and are hereby very heartily

Trustees of the British

Museum,

publish the texts printed herein, and

E.

A. Wallis Budge,

Keeper

of

the

Department of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities, who

encouraged

me

to publish this essay

and

assisted

me

in

the work.

For a modification of certain statements made on pp. 29 and

37 concerning the Dynasty of Agade, I would refer to an
Additional Note which appears at the end of this work.
C.

July

"jth,

192 1.

I.

GADD.

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER

AND AKKAD.
Chapter

I.

...

Sources.
That
logical

the Babylonian scribes

had preserved

at least the

chrono-

outhne of their history from the Flood until the Persian

conquest had always been inferred from the Greek tradition found

But

it is

only in recent years

become availaWe,

in the fragments of

in the late excerptors of Berossus.

that native evidence has

standard works on chronology, which appear to have been drawn

up and re-copied

at

necessary here to do

the central shrine of Nippur.

more than mention

that

this

It

is

un-

evidence

has, until very recently, been constituted by what may be called

two groups. The collection of Nippur fragments published by
Dr. Poebel {Historical Texts) takes up the history of Babylonia
immediately after the Flood, and would, if complete, have continued it to the end of the Isin Dynasty, which immediatelypreceded the First Dynasty of Babylon. Such, however, is the

damage
text

is

to the tablets that all the middle portion of the

mai

completely missing, and a great gap exists between the

very early Dynasty of

Awan and

that of Isin,

which concludes

Other fragments (Nos. 3 and 4) stand isolated in this

void with their references to the kingdoms of Agade and Gutium^
the

list.

but their relative position could not, without other information,

have been

fixed.

Fortunately,

some such information

existed in

the second of those groups of evidence mentioned above.

tablet published

by Father Scheil

The

in 1911,^ apparently a First

Dynasty extract from the Isin works

at

Nippur, not merely ad-

kingdoms of Agade
and Gutium, but carried the chronology back three dynasties

justed, as

it

were, the focus of these two early

Comptes rendtis de VAcadimie des Inscriptions 191

^

1? p.

606

et sqq.

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

beyond them, thus

a considerable portion of the great

filling

the earliest kingdoms on the Nippur

With these materials Dr. Poebel was able to offer a pro-

empty space which followed

lists.

visional reconstruction of Babylonian chronology from after the

Flood
.

until the

end of the

Isin Dynasty.

Since the time of that publication, therefore, the position has

may be

'Seen such as

th^

thus briefly summarised.

Disregarding

"before the Flood," our information began

legen-datry kings

.apparently with the First

Dynasty "after" that event, which was

This was followed by a dynasty of

.assigned to the city of Kish.

Uruk, and this again by one of Ur, after which there existed a
3cingdom of Awan, though few details of it were preserved. Then
came a considerable gap, over which it was obviously necessary
to distribute a

number

of kings already known, but nothing

more

than conjecture could determine their place or the number of

On the other side of this gap the list was retheir dynasties.

sumed
and

abruptly by the Scheil tablet at the dynasty of Akshak,

carried on, with only a slight break, to the beginning of

Gutium.

Of

this

last

dynasty fragments of the names of two

were preserved by No. 4 of Historical Texts after which

another, but much smaller, gap intervened before the opening of

"kings

the well-known

kingdom of Ur inaugurated by Ur-Engur.

position, therefore, was thus

("The Flood")
Dynasty of Kish

The

of

Uruk

of

Agade

of

Uruk

of

Uruk

of

Ur
I

of

Awan

{First great

^ap)

Dynasty of Aksbak
I

of Kish

of Gutium
(^Second smaller gap

Dynasty of Ur.

(Ur-Engur)

of Isin

Chapter

The

tablet

II.

B.M.

108857.

Before proceeding to any consideration of some striking new

evidence which has recently appeared

it

desirable to present

is

again an important constituent of that which was already known,

both to secure convenience of reference, and also to exhibit one

or two

some importance which have not

of

points

received comment.

The

king

list

first

hitherto

published by Scheil in

191 1, as noted above, belonged to a private collection, and was

merely lent to him by the owner that he might make known the

Scheil subse-

contents of a text so fundamentally important.

quently discovered that the tablet, broken at the lower edge, had

been dishonestly "restored" by the addition of an alien fragment,

and discovered
of the

name

also that this attempted join

had concealed

traces

of Shar-gali-sharri, a well-known king of Agade.

view of these

facts,

In

he gave a new photographic reproduction of

the tablet, accompanied by a note, in the Revue (T AssyriologU^

Vol. IX,

69.

Meantime, the tablet had also been seen and

who re-edited it with important

comments in his recent work. La Chronologie des dynasties de
Shortly before the late war this
Sumer et d^Accad^ p. 59, 60.
tablet came into the possession of the British Museum, and is here
copied by M. Thureau-Dangin,

re-published as the
I

and

follows

2).

The

result

text

of

may be

still

further

examination (Plates

transliterated

and

translated

Obverse.
1.

2.

aksak-(Ki)-a

kalam-zi lugal-dm

At Akshak

Kalam-zi, being king,

Kalam-da-lu-lu

Kalam-dalulu

xxx mu

in-ag

reigned 30 years.
xii

mu

in-ag

reigned 12 years.

as

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

Ur-ur
4.

xx mu

puzur-^' sahan

XXIV

i-^u-il

su-*^'

Gimil

in-ag

reigned 20 years.

mu

in-ag

reigned 24 years.

Ishuil
6.

in-ag

reigned 6 years.

Puzur-Sahan
5.

mu

VI

iir-ur

3.

zuen

dumu

(?)-Sin,

vii 7?iu in-ag

i-su-il-ge

son of Ishuil

reigned 7 years.

VI lugal-e-ne mu-bi

7.

xcix

in-ag-es

6 kings, their years that they reigned were 99.

8.

aksak-{Kj)-a hal-bi ba-kur nam-lugal-bi Kis-{Ki)-i^ ba-tum

At Akshak
9.

Kis-(Ki)-a

its

rule

was changed

kit ^'

ba-u

^^^ lii-ka^-din-na

At Kish Ku-Bau, hostess of a

its

royalty

tavern,

puzur^- zuen dumu

ur^' ilbaba

Ku-Bau

dumu puzur^-

zuen-ge

reading

in-ag

vi

mu

in-ag

reigned 6 years.

xxx mu

Zimudar
the

in-ag

reigned 25 years.

13. zi-mu-dar

For

mu

xxv mu

ktc^- ba-u-ge

Ur-Ilbaba, son of Puzur-Sin

1.

reigned 100 years.

Puzur-Sin, son of
12.

J^^S'^sh.

(and) being queen

11.

| unto Kish

suhus Ki-{Ki) mu-un-gi-na

lugal-dm

10.

was

in-ag

reigned 30 years.
of

UHU.KI

as

ak-Sa-ak

see

Thureau-Dangin,

Chronologie p. 61.
2.

With

this king's

name

cf.

Lugal-da-he, an early king of Adab, (Banks

Bisfuyay 196).
3.
4.

Ur-ur is actually the true reading, as suggested by Thureau-DangIxV.

For Puzur as the reading of the signs hitherto transcribed BA-SA sec
finally

Schroeder, ZeiUchrift

filr Aisyriologie xxxiii, 55.

(sa-^a-an) Cuneiform 7>jf/j XXIV, 8,

12.

''

ZA-MAL'MAL

to be read il-ba-ha

Assurverschud, Inhalts, 46,

9.

'^

MU&

1 1.

Schroeder,

Keilschrifttexte

aus

THE TABLET
14.

dumu

u-zi'Wa-dar

B.M.

lOSSS/.

zt-mu-dar-ra-ge

vi

Uzi-wadar, son of Zimudar

15.

16.

mu

in-ag

reigned 6 years.

mu

XI

el-mu-ti

in-ag

Elmuti

reigned 11 years.

iamas
Imu-Shamash

reigned 11 years.

i-tnu

^'

mu

xi

in

17. na-ni-ia-ah

Naniah

in-ag

mu

in-ag

reigned 3 years.
VIII lugal-t-ne

18.

mu-bi dlxxxvi in-ag-eS

8 kings, their years that they reigned were 586.

19.

bal-bi ba-kur nam-lugal-bi unu{g)-{Ki)-t^ ba-tum

KiS'{Ki).

(At) Kish
20.

its

unu{g)-{Ki)-ga

xxv mu

in-ag

lugal mu-bi

xxv

in-ag

king, his years that he reigned were 25.

its

rule

23. a-ga-de'{Ki)-a

At Agade

was changed;

its

Sar-ru-Ki-in

royalty was

a gardener.

ur

qa-su-du

Thureau-Dangin

{untrigadl

nu-gi-Sar

?-ba-ni

Sharru-kin

cup-bearer

17.

{unto^uruk.

unu{g)-{Ki)-ga bal-bi ba-kur \nam-lugal\bia-ga-de-{Ki)-^i)L ba-tum

At Uruk

24.

royalty was

Lugal-zaggissi, being king, reigned 25 years.

21.

22

its

lugal-zag-gi-si lugal-dm

At Uruk

changed;

rule was

^'

ilbaba

of Ur-Ilbaba,

(loc.

suggests

cit,)

Nania zadim, "Nania,

the

gem

engraver."
23. After the

name of Sharru-kin

possible to decide
it is

there

what sign was

extremely probable that

the braces might indicate

this

si.

is

a break in the surface and

originally written.

LU

is

was preceded by something

The

UR

'^'

ilbaba,

nolE^- ilbaba

not

else,

and

reading must, however, remain

doubtful.
24.

it is

certain, but

a point of considerable significance.

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD

mu-un-da

25. lugal a-ga-de-{Ki) [hi a-ga-de'{Kj)

king of Agade,

[who]

LV

26. \lugal-dm

[being king]
25, 26.

The

restorations, in square brackets, are

&

mu

{\n-ag.

reign [ed 55 years]

Mtiseum Journal of the

176

(?)]'du-a

build[ed Agade]

from the photographs in The

University of

Dec,

Pennsylvania,

1920,

178.

Reverse.
I.

a-ba-d\m lugal

'^'

a-ba-dni

who was

[was king?

^* na-nu-um lugal

*"

the king,

limmu-bi

lugal

III

mu

tn-ag

reigned 3 years.

du-du

mu

XXI

Dudu

tn-ag

reigned 21 years.

xv mu

su-DUR-KiB du?nu du-du-ge

Shudurkib

i'lu-lu

Ilulu the king,

These four

7.

lugal

Imi the king,

Igigi the king,

6.

nu lugal]
not king?]

*^- t'-mi

^'S^S^ lugal

Nanum

tn-ag]

reigned 24 years]

Shar-[gali-sharri

Who

mu

XXIV

$ar-g\a-li-Sar-ri

(?),

son of Dudu,

reigned

tn-ag
5 years.

XII lugal-e-ne mu-bi cxcvii in-ag-eS

8.

12 kings, their years that they reigned were 197

ba-kur

a'ga-de-{Ki) bal-bi

At Agade

its

was changed.

rule

1.

Restored from Poebel Hist, Texts,

2.

Restored by Poebel,

5.

The

ibid. p.

Frag.

translation given appears the

regarded collectively in this instance.

The

reading of this

name

Col. 8 (p. 80).

most probable, but the omission of the

limmu is, no doubt,
is curious,

past plural ending -eS from the verb

7.

3.

133.

is still

unknown.

THE TABLET
10. nam-lugal-bi

was carried
ur-ntgin lugal-dm

At Uruk

13.

ba-tum

unto Uruk

11. unu{g)-{Ki)-ga

ur-nigin-ge

vi

son of Ur-nigin

Kud-da

VI

utu

VI

lugal-e-ne mu-hi

xxvi

mu

in

ag

in-ag-e^

5 kings, their years that they reigned

were 26.
ba-kur

unu{g) {Ki)-ga bal-bi

At Uruk

its

was changed.

rule

ugnim gu-ti'Um-{Kjyi^

ba-tum

unto the host of Gutium

was carried

18. nam-lugal-bt

itu

sig-a

Month
12.

in-ag

reigned 6 years.

16.

Its royalty

mu

reigned 5 years.

Ur-Utu

17.

in-ag

V mu in-ag

Puzur-ili
^*

mu

reigned 6 years.

14. puzur-l-li

ur

in-ag

reigned 6 years.

Kudda

15.

mu

III

off.

Ur-nigin, being king, reigned 3 years.

Ur ^* gigir dumu
Ur-gigir,

unu{g)'{KiySu

Its royalty

12.

B.M. IO8857.

For the reading ^^^jr

off.

ud XXX {/cam)

of Siwan, 30th day.

see

now Cuneiform

Texts xxxv,
^

i.

27.

Chapter

The new
It

III.

Philadelphia Fragment (L.)

has been already stated that by far the most serious lacuna

in our partially-recorered

scheme of Babylonian chronology was

that which extended from the early dynasty of

above

Akshak, where the

text

commences.

Awan
It

to that of

is

therefore

extremely fortunate that a recent discovery has supplemented

our evidence

at this

very point.

In the summer of 1920 a

fragment from Nippur was discovered in the collections of the

Museum

University

of Pennsylvania,

and has been published

with photographs and a translation by Dr.

The Museum Journal oi 'DtctmhQx^ 1920.

ance of

this

columns of
of PoEBEL.

fragment
text

is

that

it

Leon Legrain

The

in

supreme import-

yields the middle portion of the

which were missing from the main

tablet (No. 2)

For so small a fragment, the amount of additional

information which

it

yields

{a)

Three new

{b)

The

is

astonishing.

" cities of royalty,"

position

of dynasties

and kings

hitherto

con-

jectural.
{c)

The

first

three kings of

Agade

regnal years of two.

{d)

The

first

four kings of Gutium.

in their order,

and the


THE NEW PHILADELPHIA FRAGMENT
This new

text, so far as

it is

photographs, runs as follows

(L.).

possible to decipher

it

from the

Obverse.
Coi.

[xxx mu

....

Col. IV.

III.

t\-ag

reigned 30 years.
IV (?) lugal
-

\e

iu]

'

four kings

lu

Elulu

[xxv]

mU'bi MMMDCCLXXXXii Ib-ag

their

mu

years

i-ag

they reigned

that

were 3792.

reigned 25 years.

Ki$ - (at/) s'Uukul ba

sig

Kish was smitten with arms,

[ba\ 'lu- lu

Balulu

nam - lugal - bi
royalty

its

[xxxvi]

mu t-ag

reigned

36 years.

ha -ma- zi -

{ki)

was carried

u ba - turn

off to

Hamazi

[iv] lugal
[/}a

ma]

zi

{ki)

4 kings
at

[mu
their

di clJxxi

years

that

ag- ag

they

.....

Hamazi
ki{?)-ni-i

reigned
[lugal]

were 171.

dm

being king
\uri-{Ki) ^''fukul]

Ur was

ba-sig

smitten with arms.

Col. Ill restored from

t-ag
reigned

POEBEL, Hist. Texts^

years.

no. 2, Col. III.

(f)

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD

10

Col. VI

Col. V.

adab - {ki)

adab
at

ba

- $tl

was carried

off to

{ki)

mu-bi xcix

turn

Adab

99 ...

their years

akSak

Adab

ba

^"tukul

{ki)

sig

Akshak was smitten with arms

iugal - an

ni -

mu -un- du

Lugal-anni-mundu

nam

Iugal -dm

Iugal- bi

royalty

its

being king

KtS -

xc mu l-ag

/ugal

king

u ba

was carried

reigned 90 years.
I

{ki)

Kis
at

turn

Kish

off to

{ki)

Kish

mu - bt xc l-ag
his

years that

he reigned

were 90.

adab

^-

zuen^

Puzur - Sin
ba

^''tukul

{/ci)

Adab was

puzur

sig

dumu ku ^ba-u

smitten with arms,

son of Kii

nam

its

ma-ri-

{ki)

ri

at

Iugal

royalty

was carried

ma

Bau

iugal- bi

^^ ba- turn

Mari

off to

{ki)

dm

being king

XXV mu

ag

z -

reigned 25 years.

Mari

an -pu Iugal - dm
Anpu, being king,

XXX mu\-ag
reigned 30 years
zi-i{l)

ur

^-

ilbaba

Ur-Ilbaba

dumu puzur

^-

son of Puzur

zuen
Sin

THE NEW PHILADELPHIA FRAGMENT

II

(L.).

Reverse.
Col. VII.

ya

'

Su]

ur

dil

Col. VIII.

^-

ilbaba

cup-bearer of Ur-Ilbaba,
lugal a-ga-de-(Ki)

ugnim [gu-tt'Um-{Ki)
the host of

lugal nu tuk - iuk

king of Agade
lu

Gutium

had no king

a-ga- de-{Ki)

who Agade

im

'bi

a v

mu

Imbia reigned

t -

ag

5 years.

mu-un'da(T)-du-a
in -gi-Su

built,

Ingishu
lugal

dm

being king

IN

mu

\'

ag

reigned 55 years.
ri

mu ' uS dumu

Sar -ru-ki- in

VII

mu

in-ag

reigned 7 years.

wa-ar-la -ga - ha
Warlagaba

Rimush, son of Sharru-kin

VI

XV mu l-ag

mu in-ag

reigned 6 years.

reigned 15 years.

ma- ni-

-te- su

Manishteshu

...... mu
reigned

l-ag
years.

ia-ar-la -ga-as
larlagash

.... mu
ag
reigned .... years.
\ -

12

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

Col. IX.

Col. X.

XXI lugal

[Ishme-Dajgan

g(in

21 kings

aa -gan

*
,
their years that they reigned
,

[son of Idin |-Dagan

were 124 and 40 days.

ugnbn
the host

gu '

ti - urn

of

{ki)

Gutium

^'^'tukul

ba-sig

was smitten with arms.

Inani]
its

lugal - hi

royalty

ba- turn

was carried

off to

With respect
of the

to the long

new fragment

is

gap mentioned above, the position

by

readily fixed

its

contents.

On

the

Obverse, a few surviving signs from the right side of a column

first kingdom of Ur, inaugurated by Mesannipada,
which was the third dynasty "after the Flood." These remains
belong, therefore, to Column 3 of the main text of Poebel, and

deal with the

consequently
Cols. 4,

5,

the

fragment

suppUes

the

6 on the Obverse, and Cols.

middle

7, 8, 9,

portion

of

on the Reverse,

which are

entirely missing from the former tablet.

This is
confirmed by the fragnients of a last column on the Reverse,

which correspond with Col. 10 of Poebel's text.

Finally, the
first lines of the last column of the Obverse on the new fragment
contain the summary of that dynasty of Akshak which begins
the text of the Scheil tablet.

Pennsylvania fragment

will

These

facts being settled, the

new

henceforth be quoted by the numbered

columns of Legrain's publication

the tablet here reproduced will bear

(as L.
its

Ill,

L. IV, etc.)

and

Museum number 108857.


13

Chapter

IV.

The Dynasties Kish I Kish

Towards

filling

Awan and

the gap between

II.

Akshak, the new

fragment contributes the notice of four new dynasties, Kish-

Hamazi
Adab-Mari, these pairs standing like islands,
and so creating three smaller gaps in place of one greater. The
problem is, therefore, to find whether it is now possible to fill
these spaces, and it is proposed to investigate this question in
the following pages.

The

first

step

is

What

to obtain the dimensions of the task.

are the spaces that have to be filled

In the present case this

is

merely another form of asking what number of lines, approximately,

end of one column on the fragment and the

This question may be answered by proceeding from the known to the unknown. The gaps between
Cols. III-IV, IV-V, and V~VI are unknown.
But those between
VI-VII and VII-VIII can be filled from 108857. To obtain

are lost between the

beginning of the next.

the approximate

number of

lines missing

from L. the given material

from 108857 must be re-arranged in accordance with the practice

of the L. scribe, somewhat as follows:

Between L. VI^ 12 and L.

zi mu dar
XXX mu in ag
u zi' wa dar
-

dumu

zi-mu-dar-ra-ge

mu

III

bi

VII^

xxv mu

ag

lugal-e- ne

VIII

mu

in

DLXXXVi

in -ag' es

mu

bi

KiS{Ki) bal-bi ba-kur bal - bi

na-ni' a- ah

lugal

nam

xxv

lugal - bi

ag

nam

in

ag

ga
ba - kur

unu{g)-{Ki)

mu in a^r
mu //
XI mu in ag
i mu "^-^amas
XI mu in - ag

VI
el

in

lugal

lugal - bi

unu(gy{Ki)-Hl ba-tum a-ga-de\Ki)-sii ba-tum

unu{g)

{Ki)

ga

lugal - zag - gi - si
-

dm

a-ga-de-(Ki)-a

^ar

ru

ki ' in

}-ba-ni m^-giS-Sar

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

14

As a

result of this re-arrangement

has appeared that the

it

gap between the end of L. VI and the beginning of L. VII

about 30 lines, and might be rather more. The next space,

total
is

which extends from the middle of the Agade kingdom to the

beginning of Gutium, may be similarly filled from the contents of
108857.

and

would be tedious

It

the

case

this

in

appears to comprise some 36

summary of

contains the

the

to repeat the actual process here,

may be

result

barely

The

lines.

stated

gap

this

beginning of L.

Gutium dynasty, and

here, as

IX
we

do not possess the missing portions, no very precise reckoning

But L. enumerated 21 kings in this dynasty, and
is possible.
This would leave 17 more
four are preserved in Col. VIII.
to be entered, and, allowing
arrive at a

The

result

rough

total of

34

to

each king, we might

lines missing

between L. VIII-IX.

two

of these calculations

approximately

which contained

lines

we have

that

is

and

^6,

30,

three

34

lines,

spaces

from

which the average of 33 or 34 is readily obtained, and, while

there is, of course, no mathematical exactitude about these
figures, they may still be sufficient to constitute a working
It should, perhaps, be added that, in each case, what
seems to be the smallest possible number of Hnes has been

formula.

and

allowed,

minimum

that the average therefore represents a

computation.

unknown. L. Ill
kingdom of Ur, and L. IV deals
Between
with a kingdom of Kish, followed by that of Hamazi.
and it is
of
Awan,
kingdom
be
a
to
is
known
there
points
these

The

next step

is

to apply these results to the

has traces belonging to the first

no unreasonable conjecture
of kingdoms

that this was succeeded

Awan, and 13 kings of Ur.

But, the

The summary
Ur

being

second

is

{Nt'sf.

by Ur

II.

77) gives 3 kings of

and third kingdoms of

Texts,
first

comprise 9 kings when added together, the

seen, by mere subtraction from the total 13, to have

known

to

contained four kings

(ibid,

of 4 (?) kings of Kish.

dynasties at this point is

we may attempt a

106).

L.

IV

begins with a

summary

Assuming, therefore, that the order of

Ur I, Awan, Ur II, Kish II, Hamazi,

skeleton reconstruction of the text between

THE DYNASTIES KISH

and

III-IV,

L.

obtained

KISH

II.

by the

assumption

the

test

already

figures

Between L. III^ 8 and L. IV.

nam lugal - bi
wa an {ki)

uri -

a-wa

su ba

na

an

{ki)

him

uri

(jci)

(ki)

Sic

ba

turn

-ma

etc.

8 lines for 4 kings

6 lines for 3 kings

III lugal

,,

summary

transfer to

mu-bi CCCLVI ib-ag

Ur

II

Kish II

4 kings of Kish

for

a-wa-an-{Ki)-^^'-tukul ba-sig

of

Total: 37

II.

lines.

nam- lugal -bi

In view of

add

this so-far satisfactory result,

that the sole

entirely

and

member

submerged

necessary only to

it

II,

in this position must, to that extent,

be

regarded as conjectural.
very serious.

There

the position of

Ur

II

is still

Ur

in the missing portion of the lists

that the placing of

{a)

it is

of this group of dynasties which

But the

of error

risks

is

do not appear

are, of course, three possible alternatives for

:

between Kish III

Adab.

{b)

Mari

Akshak.

(c)

Gutium

Ur

III

(/.^.,

the

Ur-Engur

dynasty).

The
rise,

last

of these

much discounted by the

and all-embracing empire of
is hardly likely that this had
of so few years, by an earlier

possibilities

is

so soon after, of the powerful

Ur-Engur and

successors;

his

been preceded, within the

kingdom of Ur.

it

limit

In addition to this

proper place,

that

this interval.

With regard

there

is

it

no room

to (a),

it

is

will

for

be argued, in the

another dynasty in

hoped

to

show that we

dispose of ample material to occupy the space between Kish III

and Adab without introducing Ur II

possibility certainly remains open;

at this point.

The second

that

space occurs the

dynasty of Mari, of uncertain length, and the

known dynasty of
is room

Akshak, comprising

six kings.

in

Whether, therefore, there


l6

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

between these depends

for another dynasty

of the Mari kingdom, which

these circumstances

II

would account

Kish II and Mari

Ur

II

is

it is

though with

now reached
Kish

all

due

Akshak

pronounce
reserve.

the gaps

Awan

as claimants for the dynasty

some evidence and none^

in favour of the first claimant,

The

Ur

has

investigation, therefore,

the point of arranging the earliest dynasties thus

Uruk

In

on the tablet which accorded very

The decision between

therefore a decision between

justifiable to

on the length

there appeared that the insertion of

it

for space

well with the other evidence.

and

entirely

at present un-ascertainable.

does not seem unfair to refer to the calcu-

attempted above;

lations

Ur

it

is

Awan

Ur

II

Kish

II.

17

Chapter
Hamazi
With
ground

this last

we

an

latter is

Uruk

to

11.

dynasty comes a momentary foothold on firm

are now, for a

Kish

exhibits a dynasty of

The

V.

entirely

new

moment,

in the light of L.

IV, which

succeeded by that of Hamazi.

(II)

and completes the

revelation,

list

of

the " eleven cities of royalty " summarised in Historical Texts,

Adab and Mari having been already conjectured by Poebel

on reasonable grounds, though these also lacked confirmation
The duration of the Hamazi kingdom
before the discovery of L.
p. 78,

is lost,

for

theless

it

preserves only part of the

one king, who reigned

kingdoms in Hist. Texts,

for

of one king.

Never-

and

it,

seven years.

that

it

The enumeration

seven years.

for

is

p. 77,

broken

after

Awan, but

hegemony was unique

the information that the next

which held

name

probable that this kingdom actually comprised only

is

in the city

was exercised by one king who reigned

Poebel has shown

(ibid.,

99) that "the

p.

enumeration corresponds to the order in which the various

first

became

seats of kings of Babylonia."

obtained are at

all correct,

seat of a dynasty after

of

retains

the next 7iew

Awan

is

{i.e.,

precisely

cities

If the results hitherto

hitherto

unmentioned)

Hamazi, and

it is

natural,

"one king for seven years" to this city.

The position of Hamazi is unknown, unless it be possible to
identify it with the Hamasi or Hamsi mentioned in the inscription

therefore, to assign the

of Eri-Nanna, a governor of Lagash in the reign of Gimil-Sin,

king of Ur.i

In

this instance

it

is

brought into close connexion

with the cities of Urbillum and Ganhar, which occur so frequently

in the date-formulae as the

enemies of Dungi and

and would consequently have

^

Rivue

to

cP Assyria logic

be sought

in

V, 99, and VI, 67.

his successor,

the immediate

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

neighbourhood of these Elamite cities. If this be so, Hamazi

would represent a second Elamite domination, Awan having been
the first. Apart from this, I am aware of only one other occurrence
of the name, but this in a singularly interesting connexion which
may provide a starting point for an attempt to bridge the next

Two

gulf in the records.

fragments of a vase from Nippur ^ bear

part of a dedication to the

who

calls

himself

**

Smiter

god Ilbaba by Utug, patesi

(?)

of Hamazi.''

an echo of the overthrow of the

city,

and,

This, then,
if so,

of Kish,

is

perhaps

we might proceed

Hamazi was succeeded by a third dynasty of Kish.

Utug does not claim the style of "king" in this

to infer that

It is true that

and it might be held that

him as the possible founder of a dynasty. But
it has yet to be shown that the use of these titles affords a rigid
distinction; certainly, the members of Ur-Nina's line at Lagash
had no formal right to the style of "king " which several of them
affected, and Utug may well have continued, in the early days of
his new-won power, the humble title which he had borne under

inscription but merely that of patesi^

this disqualifies

the sovereignty of Hamazi.

Utug

as the

first

member

If,

then,

it

be permissible to regard

of a Kish III dynasty,

successors

may be

readily

supplied,

Lugal-tarsi,

and Enbi-Ishtar.

But the

some

Mesilim,
last is

known

of his

Ur-zag-e,

(ZT/V/. Texts^

151) to have been defeated and captured by Enshakushanna of

Uruk, which city is, therefore, the successor of Kish III. To
this

dynasty of Uruk (II) are generally assigned the early monarchs

Lugal-kigubni-dudu and Lugal-kisal-si, but in

lists

no

give

help,

and the assignations

are

all

these cases the

made

chiefly

upon

epigraphical grounds or as the result of other historical indications.

It is

unfortunate that the evidence which can be extracted

from the summaries

uncertain,

But Kish
^

and

and so
I

Published
109.

is

not very satisfactory for these dynasties of

The total of 51 kings of Kish is itself

summary of 4 or (6) kings for Kish II.
comprised 23 kings, and Kish IV (dynasty of Ku-Bau)

Kish III and Uruk

by

is

II.

the

Hilprecht,

Old Babylonian Inscriptions^ Nos.

108


HAMAZI TO URUK

I9

II.

Ku-Bau

8 kings, according to 108857, though L. ignores

Consequently

herself.

11^
Total kings 1
^ j>5i
of Kish

Kish

22

^r-

tt

^
4 or 6 >34or 37.

rry

i.

Kish II

Kish IV

"^

or 8 J

and therefore, by subtraction, Kish III had 17 or 14 kings.

That it was a long dynasty is probable from the comparatively^
large number of early Kish rulers who are known to us by name..
With regard to Uruk II, although the number of kings in the
Uruk I dynasty is uncertain, the conclusion of Poebel {Ift's^.
Texis^ p. 107) is that "in no case can we assume more than four
missing kings for the second and fifth dynasties." If Enshakushanna, Lugal-kigubni-dudu, and Lugal-kisal-si composed Uruk II,
it would follow that Uruk V consisted of Utu-ljegal alone
nor
is this improbable, but the question does not arise here and may
be postponed to its own place. The position is, therefore, that a
long dynasty of Kish and a short one of Uruk are to be placed
after Hamazi, and these appear sufficient to fill the gap which
occurs in L. before Adab.
Having thus reached the second
"island," we may again set out the result of the investigation up
;

to this point

Kish

I
Uruk I
Ur
Hamazi
Kish III

Awan
Uruk

Ur

II

Kish II

II.

B 2

20

Chapter

VI.

Adab, Mari, Akshak, and Kish IV.

The

record

is

now taken up by

L. V, which here begins a

Ickigdom of Adab inaugurated by Lugal-anni-mundu, who

to have been the sole king of his dynasty

90

This king

years.

is

known from a

and

later

said

is

to have reigned for

copy of one of

his

No. 75 in Poebel's collection. The

statement that he reigned for 90 years is, however, both improbable in itself, and not in accordance with the trend of other
inscriptions published as text

evidence which we possess.

be the

modem

The

site

of

Adab

is

now known

to

Bismya, from which Banks, during his excavations,

recovered a stone statue with an archaic inscription^ stating that

He

found

also a vase bearing a similar legend, ^ but this time with the

name

the figure represented one Lugal-da-lu, king of Adab.

of Me-shi-

?,

also a king of

that both these rulers,

Adab.

There seems reason

and possibly

to

others, belong to the dynasty

inaugurated by Lugal-anni-mundu, and that L.

is

incorrect in

assigning to one king so unusual a length of reign.

however, be admitted that we cannot

Adab somewhat

another dynasty of

Marl and Akshak.

have belonged to

tell

to Lugal-anni-mundu

It

may,

whether there was not

later,

If there was, Lugal-da-lu

it

suppose

in

the gap between

and Me-shi-

might

nevertheless, the reign of 90 years attributed

is

highly suspicious,

and very probably has

incorporated the years of other kings whose names have been, by

some mischance, lost from the record.

Adab, we learn from L. V, was succeeded by

a dynasty of

Mari, a city on the middle Euphrates, just below the confluence

of the Habur, from which

came

the founder of the Isin dynasty.

^

Banks, Bisinya^

p. 196.

also, in later times, Ishbi-Irra,

Unfortunately, L.
- Ibid., p.

V breaks off at
264.

ADAB, MARI, AKSHAK,

AND KISH

the very beginning of the Mari kings, giving only the

Anpu,^

who

Museum

broken statuette in the British

of them,

no evidence

bears a fragmentary

Shamash, king of Mari, who may also be

assigned to this dynasty.

at

all,

broken away.

as the

Of its total length, however, we have

summary {Hist. Texts, p. 77) is also
Akshak)
whole

For the third gap (between Mari

are therefore

left

without any guide.

of the Akshak dynasty, as

VI opens

gap, for L.

first

reigned 30 years, and a few traces of his successor.

inscription^ of

we

21

IV.

with

Practically the

known from 108857,

its

occurs within this

This would

concluding summary.

account for a considerable part of the available space, but whether

anything intervened between the end of Mari and the beginning

Akshak depends entirely on the length of Mari, which is

unknown.
The possibility has already been noted (p. 15)
that Ur II might occur in this place.
But, while withholding
of

we

judgment, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary

assume that no other kingdom did intervene between these

shall

two.

It

is,

however,

period there has to

fairly clear that in this

be placed the local line of Ur-Nina and his successors

though

it is

as luga/ of

Eannadu was

not necessary to hold that

Babylonia, reigning at Kish.

all

"kingdoms" which the summary

allows

to

at

Lagash,

ever recognised

Indeed, the four

Kish are already

accounted for ; three have been passed in the preceding pages,

and the fourth

From

this

is

that of

Ku-Bau, which succeeded Akshak.

to the beginning of Gutium,

onwards

point

we

except for a break in the middle of Agade,

are in the fuller

light of

108857, which, though presenting a connected

without

difficulties

of

its

own.

The dynasty

by Ku-Bau, succeeds that of Akshak both

text, is

not

of Kish IV,
in

founded
108857 and in L.

This passage, in the former, has been a well known crux since
first

discovery owing to

its

of reign attributed to the

risen

first

ruler,

from a tavern to the throne.

^

its

very singular arithmetic, and the length

The reading of this name

is,

Ctmeiform Texts V, 121 46.

a queen

who

is

said to

have

Eight monarchs composed

of course, doubtful.

22

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

this dynasty,

and the

scribe of 108857, adding

years, obtains the incredible result of 586!

up

their total of

Actually, the

sum

of the eight reigns, even including the impossible 100 years of

no more than

Ku-Bau, amounts

to

attempts have been

made

192.

Several

ingenious

to explain this extraordinary aberration,

but none can be described as entirely convincing, and the confusion

is

now

altogether,

king.

increased by L., which ignores the reign of

though

it

Ku-Bau

mentions her as mother of the succeeding

Unfortunately, L. does not continue to the end of the

dynasty and therefore throws no

light

upon the curious

total

given

by 108857. In these circumstances it seems most prudent to

acknowledge the difficulty, and to recognise that there existed at
this point some confusion in the records which will scarcely be
explained without further discoveries.

23

Chapter

The
of

VII.

reigns of Lugal-zaggisi and Sargon.

Kish IV, the tablet continues, was succeeded by a kingdom

(III), the sole member of which was Lugal-zaggisi, who

Uruk

reigned 25 years. This celebrated monarch was known, before

the discovery of 108857, as a subject of a long archaic inscription

engraved on vases dedicated at Nippur, and also as a governor

of

Umma, who

sacked the city of Lagash under Urukagina,

its

Since that time the Historical Inscripiio7ts of Poebel

last king.

have revealed a number of new

that he was defeated

facts

concerning him, particularly

and captured by the even more celebrated

Sargon (Sharru-kin), founder of the succeeding dynasty of Agade.

It is

unnecessary to re-emphasise the great interest of the details

which the

tablet furnishes concerning

Though
name must

Sargon of Agade.

the meaning of the signs immediately following his

still

remain obscure owing to uncertainty of reading, he

described as having been

"a

gardener," and this

in

is

is

clearly

accordance

tells how the infant was

mother and rescued by Akki,
the irrigator, who brought him up and made him a gardener.
Further, a fragment of a history of Sargon, published by Scheil in

with the " Legend of Sargon,"^ which

launched on the Euphrates by

his

the Revue cT Assyriologie XIII,

among

The

the cattle."

even more interesting

Ur-Ilbaba."

The

176, states

that

he "grew up

next information given by 108857 is

the young Sargon was " cupbearer of

tablet has hitherto

been misread

in this place,

and

translated "cupbearer in the temple of Ilbaba."

sign

is

aware,
it

quite clearly

and

UR,

not

% as

now confirmed by L. But to translate

Zamama,' with Legrain, does not appear a natural

this reading is

" devotee of

But the

have for some time been

Cutuiform Texts XIII, 42,

43.

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

24

interpretation
far to

seek

Ur-Ilbaba

its

clearly a proper

is

Nor have we

name.

Ur-Ilbaba, son of Puzur-Sin, grandson ot

bearer.

Ku-Bau, was the third king of the preceding Kish IV dynasty

and reigned 6 years.
The record therefore appears to state
definitely that Sargon, in his youth,
retainer, of this

accepted

may be

was cupbearer, a favourite

The importance

at its face value, is considerable,

Nevertheless,

provides.

it

former king.

it

of this statement,

owing to the synchronism

seems to involve great

difficulty,

The remaining
30 4-6 + ii + ii + 3 =

seen by a simple calculation.

Kish, after Ur-Ilbaba, reigned

altogether,

and were succeeded by

25 years.

The

latter

as

kings of

6i

years

Lugal-zaggisi, with a reign of

was defeated by Sargon, who became king

and reigned 55 years

(according to

continued as a subject for

61+25

Sargon,

L.).

years, then

therefore,

became king and

reigned 55 more.
Even had he been only 10 years old at the
death of Ur-Ilbaba, this would give him an age of 10 + 61 + 25 + 55

This, then, is a reductio ad absurdum the explanamust manifestly be sought by some other means.
And
there seems to be only one possibility.
It is no longer a new

151 years

tion

discovery that the Babylonian scribes have in several instances

conveyed a wrong impression by arranging

which were actually

in succession dynasties

in part contemporary.

Thus, the dynasty of

Isin synchronised not merely with that of Larsa (which has not

yet appeared in the connected dynastic

lists)

but also partly with

the First Dynasty of Babylon, which began to rule not

than the middle of the Isin kingdom.^

lists

exhibit the

the First

founder

it

of

Second Dynasty

much

later

Subsequently, the king

as following immediately

upon

has long been known, however, that Iluma-ilum, the

the

Second

Dynasty,

was not

the

successor

Samsu-ditana, but the contemporary of Samsu-iluna.^

these familiar instances

it

is difficult

of

In view of

to resist the conclusion that

same process is at work between the dynasties of Kish IV,

Uruk III, and Agade, and that both Lugal-zaggisi and Sargon
must have set up as independent rulers while the dynasty of
the

Thureau-Dangin,

Chronologies p. 47.

king, Chronicles

II, 20.

THE REIGNS OF LUGAL-ZAGGISI AND SARGON.

Kish IV

still

In support of

existed.

the fragment mentioned above

this, it is

25

possible to quote

23) which, after referring to a

(p.

king of Kish, continues "to change the rule of his royalty, to

prolong

ruin

the

of

irrevocably resolved;

mention

is

made

palace,

his
in

Kish and Agade, but Sargon

appears at the head of a

At what

rival

story

power

No

But

it

taken up again, he

war

in

which he was

Kish took place

may be

more than a coincidence,

that

it is,

pointed out, even

the

25

correspond exactly with the reigns of the

+ 11 + 3), and

is

offering hostile provocations

finally

precise time these revolts of Lugal-zaggisi

their loyalty to

impossible to say.

(11

holy decree,

exhibited as the direct successor

is

when the

to Lugal-zaggisi as the prelude to a

and Sargon from

his

(came) Sharrum-kin."

of Lugal-zaggisi intervening between the rule of

of the kings of Kish, and,

victorious.

by

Enlil,

place

his

years
last

of course,

if it

be no

of Lugal-zaggisi

three kings at Kish

one might conjecture that Lugal-zaggisi pro-

claimed his independence upon the death of Uzi-wadar, but

lacked either the desire or the means to dispossess the dynasty of
Kish, which continued until

came

its

own

city

and

that of Lugal-zaggisi

simultaneously under the rule of Sargon.

The 55

years of

the latter would seem to include the whole time that he reigned
in his

in

own

not merely the period in which he w^as supreme

city,

Babylonia;

for,

contained in the

even

if

the rule of Lugal-zaggisi be wholly

last years of

Kish IV, Sargon must have been

some 70 years old at the fall of that dynasty, and, though it

known that he lived to be an aged man, we cannot venture
add another 55 years to his life.

is

to

26

Chapter

VIII.

Stories concerning Sargon.

The
king,

which exhibits Sargon as cupbearer

detail

as rising from this office to the throne,

and

to a

is

eiusdem generis to the stories of his humble birth in which

other

former

an addition
all

our

This somewhat naive romance of the

sources concur.

menial become king must have had a peculiar fascination for the

Babylonians; one of the

is

earliest rulers "after the Flood," Arpi,

said to have been " son of a plebeian "

Queen

been a publican Irra-imitti, ninth king of

upon the head of

Enlil-bani, his gardener. ^

Ku-bau had
crown

set the

I sin,

Better

known than

these are the very similar stories which are told about a later
hero,

Cyrus,

the

Persian.

The

circumstantial

narrative

of

107-130), which makes Cyrus the grandson of

Astyages, and relates how his life was secretly saved from the

Herodotus

(I,

king's jealousy

by an oxherd who was charged to expose the child

probably derived through the Median house of

in the desert, is

Harpagus from Babylonian sources.

unexpected preservation of Cyrus

is

Even

this

account of the

reminiscent of the rescue of

infant Sargon from the Euphrates by Akki the irrigator.

But Ctesias had a version of the early days of Cyrus even more
characteristic of its Mesopotamian origin, and, in view of its striking
parallelism with the present story concerning Sargon, it may be
worth while to translate a part of this version, which survives only
in a long fragment of the later historian Nicolaus Damascenus

the

(No. 66

in C.

Muller's Fragme?ita Historicorum Graecorum^

Vol. Ill, p. 397) :~

" In Asia, upon the death of the

Astyages succeeded to his throne.

was the most

valiant
^

man

Median

after Arbaces.

King, ChrmicUs

king, his son

Report says that he

II, 12.

It

was during

his

STORIES CONCERNING SARGON.

27

reign that there occurred the great revolution by which the

sovereignty of the

Medes passed

to the Persians.

The

reason

There was a custom among the Medes that if a

poor man went to a wealthy man for maintenance, offering
himself to be fed and clothed, he should be considered as a
was

this.

however, the host should not provide

slave of the latter.

If,

these, the suppliant

might betake himself to another.

a boy

named

came

Cyrus, a Mardian by birth,

of the king^s servants,

who was

Now

thus to one

set over the palace cleaners.

Cyrus was the son of Atradates, a bandit through stress of

poverty, whose wife Argoste, the mother of Cyrus, made her
living as a goatherd.

Cyrus,

maintenance

officer for

then,

hired himself to this

he cleaned the palace and was

His master, therefore, gave him a

ment and brought him from among the outside

industrious.

those

who cleaned

inside,

in

better gar-

cleaners to

apartments,

the king's

placed him with the master of these servants.

and

This man,

however, was so cruel, and beat Cyrus so often, that he

deserted him for the torch-bearer,

who took

a fancy to him,

and brought him near the king to be one of his personal

torch-bearers.
Here, too, he was distinguished, and now
passed on to Artembares, the chief of the cup-bearers, who
actually held the cup for the king to drink.
Artembares
received him gladly, and bade him pour out wine for the
king's guests.
Not long afterwards, when Artembares was
watching him serving well and adroitly, and offering the cup
gracefully, the king asked Artembares whence came the boy,
adding, "

How

nicely he serves the wine

plied Artembares, **he

of the

Mardians,

maintenance."
that

he took a

is

"

" Master," re-

thy slave, a Persian by birth, and

who hath

Now

delivered

Artembares was

fever, so that

himself to
old,

and

it

he besought the king to

me

for

chanced
let

him

And
in my place," he said, "this boy (meaning Cyrus) whom
thou approvest, shall serve thy wine. And, for that I am
an eunuch, I will also make him my son, if his service be
go to

his

own house

until

he should be recovered.

"

28

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

pleasing to thee, his master."

Astyages assenting, Artembares

many directions to Cyrus and many kindnesses

own son. Cyrus now stood beside the king, offered

departed with
as to his

wine by night and day, and discovered

Artembares died of his
and courage.
adopting Cyrus as his son, and Astyages

his cup, served his

much

discretion

sickness

after

bestowed on him, as son, the whole of Artembares' substance,

and many gifts as well, so that he was by now a great man,

and
It is

his

name was noised

abroad."

evident that these are genuine folk-stories, and they may,

without hesitation, be pronounced to be of Babylonian origin;

the young Cyrus

is

merely a double of the young Sargon, both

being of true plebeian origin, both miraculously saved in their

infancy,

both employed in the service of a former king, both

actually his cupbearers,

stead.

There

is,

and both destined

to reign in their master's

of course, nothing to indicate what degree of

historical truth underlies these stories in either instance.

29

Chapter
Agade
The

dynasty of Agade

whose order

is

now

is

IX.

to Isin.

continued by Rimush and Manishtusu,

definitely settled

by

L., to

which we are also

indebted for the 15 years of Rimush. After Manishtusu another

break occurs, so that the name of the king who intervened between

him and Naram-Sin

is still

As, however, there are only

missing.

10 or 20 years (the variation depends on the question whether

Naram-Sin reigned 54 or 44 years)

and the unknown, and

between Manishtusu
was himself a powerful and

to divide

as the former

important king, the reign of the unknown was probably short.

With the exception of

this king's

name, and some doubt about

the lengths of certain reigns, the dynasty of

As

in outline.

regards the last king,

it

Agade

is

now recovered

has been thought worth

while to reproduce, at the end of this essay (Plate

of the sole
identical

monument

with that published by

M. Pognon

a copy

3),

The

hitherto assignable to him.

in the

text is

Journal

I9i3> P- 4iS, but it is difficult to say whether the

object upon which it is inscribed is actually the one which he
Asiatique^

saw

in

Baghdad.

In the present case the text

is

taken from

a hammer-head of dark green marble, measuring 4 inches by

\\ inches, and pierced through the middle with a hole \ inch in
diameter.
flattened,

The shape

is

an elongated

ellipse with the

ends un-

both edges are chamfered, and the whole very carefully


THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

30

beginning on the top chamfer, extending

and ending on the lower chamfer and base

finished, the inscription

down one

side,

a-na

ne-unu-gal a-na na-pit-si^ su-dur- kib'^

la - ba - enum{Sumy
a - ga - de - {ki)
sar-ri
sabru bitim a - MU - RU (= isruq),
^

" To Nergal, for the

Laba

life

of Shudurkib

(?),

king of Agade,

(?)-erishum, the palace soothsayer, has dedicated this."

At the fall of the Agade Dynasty, the hegemony in Babylonia

passed to an undistinguished line of ^v^ kings who ruled for
26 years in Uruk as the fourth dynasty of that

known- of these beyond what appears

their regnal years,
*'

the

and the

Nothing

city.

is

108857 ; their names,

that their rule was cut short by

fact

in

host of Gutium," to which the sovereignty passed.

At

this

point 108857 ends abruptly, but Poebel's texts contain a

of the Gutian Dynasty, giving a total of

summary
21 kings who reigned

125 years and 40 days, while L. computes 124 years and 40 days.
But, whereas the dynasty has almost completely disappeared from

the former, L. preserves the names of the

first

four kings, prefaced

with the curious statement that "the host of Gutium had no

king," which

presumably means that no single authority was

The names

recognised until the hordes settled in Babylonia.

common

the third and fourth kings contain a

which reappears

Umma, who
the time

at

an

arlaga

of

Nammahni, a governor of
his own city
was king of Gutium" (u{d)~ba

in the inscription*^ of

records his building of a temple in

"when

larlagan

l-ar-la-ga-an lugal gti'ti-um-kani),^

^

element

It

may not be

too venturesome

napistii^ tiapisUi.
The same phrase occurs in
Naram-Sin (published by Scheil, Textes elafnitcs-simitiques
There seems no need
closely parallel with the present text.

Probably a metathesis for

inscription of

which is
assume identity with the na-si-zu of Clay {Miscellaneous Inscriptions)
No. 18) unless /iV be there accidentally omitted.
III, 6),

to

2
3

The
The

king's

name

is

of uncertain reading.

third sign of this

name

is

KAM

and eritum{Suni)

probable reading. LA-BA may also be an ideogram

^ Clay, Miscellaneous Inscriptions^ No. 13.

(</.

is

therefore the

Brunnow,

988).

5 With this may be compared a similar date referring to Sium, king of

Gutium (ScHEiL, Comptes-rendtis de VAcadhuie, 1911, p. 319, II. 14, 15).

AGADE TO

3^

ISIN.

to identify this larlagan with larlagash, the fourth king of

according to L.

.After

name

this

L.

Gutium,

broken, and the next

is

column preserves only the summary of the dynasty, and the

statement of
its

its

downfall, but not the

power passed.

Dynasty of

gap?

Isin.

Some

L.

Finally,

What

to

is

uncertainty

still

name

be inserted
exists

of the city to which

has traces

on

belonging to the

remaining

in this last

this head.

Isin

well

is

known to have been the successor of the celebrated Dynasty of

Ur (III) which was constituted by 5 kings reigning for 117 years.
On the other hand, we have external information that the Gutians
were expelled from Babylonia by one Utu-hegal, king of Uruk,^
and this is in accord with the summaries, which give 5 kingdoms
of

Uruk

that of Utu-feegal

The

already enumerated.

is

therefore the

uncertainty

is

fifth,

four having been

now narrowed down

to

the question whether there was yet another dynasty between those

Uruk and Ur. It may be said at once that this appears

Poebel had formerly proposed {Hist, Texts^ 93) to insert
a second kingdom of Adab at this point, but Lugal-anna-mundu
is shown by L. to belong to the first Dynasty of Adab, and there
are now no grounds for assuming any domination of that, or
of

unlikely.

either of the other, " cities of royalty "

been taken into account.

In

these

beyond what has already

circumstances,

only

the

remaining question concerns the number of kings and the duration

of Utu-hegaPs dynasty (Uruk V).

First, then, let

it

be recalled

Poebel has concluded, from examination of the main text,

that no more than four kings are available for distribution between
Uruk II and V. It has, however, seemed probable that Uruk II
was composed of 3 kings, Enshakushanna, Lugal-kigubni-dudu,
and Lugal-kisal-si, in which case one only, Utu-hegal himself,
would be left for Uruk V. Further, by reconstructing the text
that

backwards from L.

through the Dynasty of Ur, including the

necessary formulae at the beginning and end of dynasties,

be found that the space

^

left is

sufficient

For the inscription commemorating his triumph, see

and X, 99, 100.

in Ri^vue (V Assyriologie IX, 111-120,

it

will

only for a very short

Thureau-Dangin

32

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

more than one or two kings. Finally,
some measure of

dynasty, probably of no

the contemporary history of Lagash supplies

In the time of Dungi, second king of

collateral evidence.

votive wig of black diorite dedicated to

Ur

III,

mentioned on a
the goddess Bau, and it

a certain Ur-Ningirsu, high-priest of Nina,

is

has long been held, with the greatest probability, that this person
is
**

identical with Ur-Ningirsu, the son of

beloved priest of Nina

" in

one of

Gudea, who

his

own

himself

calls

brick inscriptions.^

But the activity and semi-independence of Gudea, which permitted

him even to embark upon a private military expedition against
Anshan,2 shews that at least some part of his reign must have lain
in a period when there was no universally predominant power in
Babylonia, and it is the period between the fall of Gutium and
the rise of Ur which best corresponds with these conditions.
It
has already been mentioned (p. 30) that Nammahni, a patesi of
Umma, was in all probability a contemporary of the fourth king
But Nammahni was also the name of a patesi of
of Gutium.
Lagash, son-in-law of Ur-Bau, and predecessor of Gudea by a
time which would appear to have embraced several generations,
during which the names of four other patesis of Lagash are
known. Umma was the near neighbour and ancient rival of
Lagash, and it does not seem an impossible assumption that
the two Nammahni's were identical, one man combining the
rule of both cities either

by conquest or consent.

The

fourth

king of Gutium reigned about 100 years before the end of his
dynasty, and,

if

the identification proposed might be accepted,

would tend again to fix the date of Gudea during the latter
But the son of
years and after the fall of the Gutian Dynasty.
this

Gudea

was, as

it

has appeared, a contemporary of Dungi, the

second king of Ur.

All evidence, therefore, seems to agree in

indicating that the Dynasty of

Uruk

was

short,

and

very considerable gap intervened between the defeat of

and the formation of Ur-Engur's kingdom.

^

Dicoiivertes en Chaldee II, PI. 37, No. 8.

Gudea, Statue B. VI, 64-69.

that

no

Gutium


33

Chapter X.

A new

text of Libit-Ishtar.

With the Dynasty of

mentioned

may

Isin,

which succeeded Ur

It has,

fitly close.

however, seemed worth while to

an inscription of Libit-Ishtar,

this point,

not because

III,

and

is

the fragments of L. X, this chronological survey

in

it

fifth

insert, at

king of that dynasty,

has any historical value, but because of

its

interest

as being only the second inscription of this king as yet recovered.

Unlike the

No.

tions^

event.

first

27),

The

(best represented in

it is

which

text (Plate 3),

cones in the British Museum,^

as follows
Col.

I.

Clay, Miscellaneous Inscrip-

written in Akkadian,

and deals with a

may be

and rendered

transcribed

{i)^'li-bi-it-istar {2) ri-i-um

(5) i'ka-ru-um

(3)/^-//-/^ {^) nippurim-iKi)

shepherd who feareth

Libit-Ishtar, the

(6) ki-nu-um

Nippur,

(7) ^^ uri-(Ki)-im

the constant waterer

of Ur,
(9) a-na eridi-(Ki)

(8) la mu-pa-ar-ki-um

that ceaseth not his care

the adornment

(14) Sar ma-at

the beloved
bi'bi-ii

beloved
^

The

the lord,
( 1

3)

sar

the king of Isin,

(15) Su-me-ri-im

(16)2) a-ga-ti-im

and Akkad,

of Sumer,

{i?>) li'i-ba

ifar

(ig) a-na-ku

of the heart of Ishtar,

(22)

l-si-in-{Ki)

of Uruk,

king of the land

{i^j) bi-bi-il

(10) bel-um

for Eridu,

(12) unu{g)-{Kr)

(11) zi-ma-at

(21)

different

copied from two small clay

is

/-//

of the

'^

belim

hand of Bel

am

{20) ga-ni-in

(23)

/}

''

biltim (H-im)

and

Beltu,

writer has also seen several further examples in private possession.

34

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

Col. II.

(2) a-al sar-ru-ti-ia

(i) i-na l-si'in-{Ki)

my

in Isin

(3) i-na ba-ab ekallim (ini)

(4)

at the palace-gate,

(9) i-na

iitar

ma-at

and Akkad
(13) e-pu-us

had established

did build.

The meaning of this word, which

ganumt is found

20.

I.

appears doubtful,

(81-7-27, 200. Rev. 21), but

is

it

is

indicated that the ideogram

describes the king's construction,

in

Cuneiform

Texts XII.

27

there also of uncertain meaning, though

explained was

GA-I-NUN.

This

an unpublished inscription of
(B.M. 1 14399), who there says that he built diganunma]^

composite sign actually appears

Enannadu

(11) ^ a-ga-ti-im

Sumer

(12) aS-ku-nu-ni

Col.

belim

justice

(10) ^u-mt-ri-im

of

'^

(8) ki-i-ta-am

when

I,

ma-ru

the son of B^l,

Libit-Ishtar,

in the land

(5)

(7) i-nu-mi

(6) a-na-ku

even

li-bi-it

royal city,

in

The word is tentatively rendered ** bedgod Lugal-Erim.

chamber" by Ungnad, Babylonische Briefe^ p. 216. But, in view of
POEBEL, Historical Texts, No. 6, 9, where it is related that one Annani
built the giS'Sar-^nai. of Enlil at Nippur, it seems possible to compare
the Arabic gunatnak^ * garden.'
for

It will

the

be observed that the

first

part of the inscription, containing

Akkadian translation of the

But linguistically the most
interesting point is the phonetic complement in Col. I, 23,
* NiN-LiL (ti'itn)^ which points unequivocally to the reading biltim.
It cannot, therefore, be doubted that, under the Isin Dynasty, the
the

royal

titles,

is

merely an

corresponding lines in the Sumerian.

Enlil and Ninlil were pronounced Bel and Beltu

by the Semitic speakers. The cones which bear this
text are clearly derived from the site of Isin, which is still
unknown, and it is a matter of regret that in no case has it been

divine

names

respectively

possible to acquire any information as to their provenance.

35

Chapter

XL

Rim-Sin of Larsa and Rim-Sin of Ashur.

Attention

may perhaps be

directed

to

one more

curious

circumstance, before closing this survey of the early Babylonian

The

dynasties.

city of Isin is

fronted, throughout

its

now known

to

have been con-

period of nominal supremacy, by the rival

power of Larsa, and finally to have been vanquished by the arms

But by this time a third claimant to the hegemony
of Rim-Sin.
had appeared, and the fall of Isin merely brought Larsa face to
face with the rising strength of the First Dynasty of Babylon.
The founder of this dynasty, Sumu-abum, was known from a
chronicle^ to have been a contemporary of Ilushuma, one of the

and later information^ adds that Ilushuma's

successor, Irishum I, was the contemporary of Sumu-la-ilu, the
successor of Sumu-abum. Three more kings reign at Babylon,
and then comes Hammurabi, who, as is well known, defeated
Rim-Sin of Larsa.
But, after four successors of Irishum I at
Ashur, the throne of that city is also occupied by a king bearing
the name of Rim-Sin
That is to say, that the cities of Ashur
and Larsa must have been ruled at almost precisely the same
early kings of Assyria,

time by kings of the same name.

that identity

is

to

be assumed.

inference, and, indeed, the date-hst of

may be

trusted to reflect the

makes no reference
Babylonia.

to

not intended to suggest

It is

There

no warrant for any such

Rim-Sin of Larsa, which

is

more notable events of

any enterprise beyond the

his reign,

limits of

southern

In these circumstances, the identity in the names of

cities so far separated as Ashur

and Larsa might be considered simply as a remarkable coincidence.
But it is worthy of note that Ashur had, before this, acknowledged
the suzerainty of Bur-Sin I, and is also known to have been
under the control of Hammurabi. Neither of these kings appear,

contemporary rulers between two

however, in the
^

list

of actual Assyrian rulers.

King, Chronicles II, 14.

SCHROEDER, ZeitschHft fur Assyriohgie, XXXIII,

58.

36

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

TABLE OF EARLY DYNASTIES.

AFTER THE FLOOD.
First kingdom of KISH
Kingdom of AWAN
Euechios^

2,400 years

Chomasbelos

2,700

3 kings

Zugagib
Arpi (son of a

900
840

720

410

king

611

900

,,

Barsalnunna

1,200

doubtful names)
1

First kingdom of

URUK

Meskingasher,

325 years

Enmerkar

420

1,200

100

Lugal-banda

(the

shepherd)

Dumuzi

hunter)

Third kingdom of KISH

Utug
Ur-zag-e
Lugal-tarsi

Enbi-Ishtar

(and other kings)

(Summary

doubtful)

URUK

Enshakushanna
Lugal-kigubni-dudu

I26(?)
Gilgamish
(several more kings)

(Summary

Mesannipada,^

Lugal-kisal-si

uncertain)

First kingdom of

UR

(?)

kings

Kingdom of
Lugal-anna-mundu

80 years
30

Elulu

25

36

,,

171

Balulu

following a

name

ADAB
90

(?)

years

Lugal-da-lu

Meskiagnunna

A comma

7 years

Second kingdom of

(the

4 kings

HAMAZI

Mesilim

8,000 + years,
3 months, 3 days

2 3 kings

KISH

3,792 years

kingdom of

Enmenunna,
Melam-Kish
.(7

(or) 6 kings

(a shepherd)^ 635(?)
?

108 years

4 kings

Second kingdom of

plebeian)

Etana

UR

Second kingdom of

{6 kings unknoivn)

Galumum

356 years

,,

Me-shi

(number of kings doubtful)

90 years

indicates that the king

was succeeded by

his son.

TABLE OF EARLY DYNASTIES.

AFTER THE FLOOD. 37

MARI

Kingdom of
Anpu

30 years

(and other kings)

-Ur-Nina
of Lagash

(summary doubtful)

(?)

AKSHAK

Kingdom of
Kalam-zi

30 years

Kalam-dalulu

12

Ur-ur
Puzur-Saljan

20

Ishuil,

24

99

Gimil Sin
6 kings

Fourth kingdom of

KISH
Kingdom of

AGADE
Sharru-kin,

Ku-Bau,

Puzur-Sin,

25

Ur-Ilbaba
55 years

30

Third kingdom of

Uziwadar

URUK

Imi-Shamash 11
Nania
3
8 kings

Rimush

15 years

Manishtusu

(?)

(?)

Naram-Sin

44

Igigi.

Imi.

Nanum.

Elulu ,}

Dudu,
Shudurkib
12 kings

(?

54) years

24

2
(?)

Urukagina

Zimudar,
Elmuti

Shar-gali-sharri

years

15

197

Lugal-zaggisi 25 years

92-}- years

iking

25 years


38

THE EARLY DYNASTIES OF SUMER AND AKKAD.

Fourth kingdom of

URUK

Ur-nigin

3 years

Ur-gigir

Kudda

Puzur-ili

Ur-Utu

5 kings

26

Kingdom of

GUTIUM

Imbia

5 years

Ingishu

Warlagaba

larlagash

(17 more

kings, including:

-Nammafeni of Umma
(and Lagash ?)

Erridu-pizir

Lasirab

Sium
Gudea,

Saratigubisin

of Lagash

Tirigan)
i24(? 5) years, 40 days

21 kings

Fifth Kingdom of

URUK

Utu-hegal

(Summary

doubtful)

Third kingdom of
Ur-Engur
Dungi

'

UR

18 years

58

-Ur-Ningirsu, son of

Gudea

of Lagash

Bur-Sin I

Gimil-Sin

Ibi-Sm
5 kings

117

-Zariku, akkanakku of

Ashur

AFTER THE FLOOD. 39

TABLE OF EARLY DYNASTIES.

p4

CO

<

s a

1^

CO
I

O
o

o
Q
O

rO 00 00
rf CO M

CO

CO CO

CO

<

a
c
CO

I
f3

11-1
^ V a

C\ vo

CO

o
Q
o

a
j

:3

a
a

N o

CO

CO

iz:

f5

<: CO

.s .s
CO CO

f2

s
co<

4-*

VO

CO
<M

CO

00
C^

M lO>VO
N

'^COmrj-M

P c

M
CO

^P

o
Q
o
{2

O
M

G S

W3 "T
a cr

CO

2l;qll

G
(7)

e<

bd9

G
VO

M M
M CO

a 2
3

1:3 I a
I
ffi>co <; < <

;;

CO

x^
CO

00

CO

40

APPENDIX.
In the preceding pages, and

in the

to fix absolute chronology has

list

of dynasties, any attempt

been purposely avoided.

may,

It

however, be pointed out that the reconstruction of the Assyrian

combined with the chronological notes given by various

kings, and the known synchronisms with the first
dynasty of Babylon, offer a new and promising means of
approaching the early dynasties of Sumer and Akkad. Thus,
Esarhaddon (b.c. 681-668) records^ that Shalmaneser I lived
580 years before his time, i,e.^ 680 + 580=1260 B.C. roughly.
But Shalmaneser I himself states ^ that one Shamshi-Adad
preceded him by 580 years, and that Irishum lived 159 years
king

list,

Assyrian

before this Shamshi-Adad.

By

addition, therefore, the date of

Irishum, according to Shalmaneser

about

B.C.

Tukulti-Enurta

2000.

was 1260 + 580+159,

I,

I,

son of Shalmaneser

been assigned on other grounds to the period about

1240.

B.C.

I,

/>.,

has

1260-

king also gives ^

It is interesting, therefore, to find that this

a date for Ilushuma, the father of Irishum, 780 years before his

own

time,

/.^.,

1250 + 780 = 2030 b.c, which agrees very well

It is true that Esarhaddon,

with Shalmaneser's date for Irishum.

in the passage already quoted, gives the intervals

Shamshi-Adad

as

434

years,

126 years, thus obtaining a date of

is

Shalmaneser

and Shamshi-Adad
b.c.

1820

Irishum

for Irishum.

as

There

thus a conflict of evidence, but in view of the higher antiquity

of Shalmaneser, and the confirmation of his dating by his son

Tukulti-Enurta
^

I,

it

seems

belter

to

reject

the

version

Messerschmidt, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur historischen Inhalts, No. 51,

11. 12-32.

col. II,

^ Ibid.i
2

of

No.

13, Reverse, col. Ill,

32 col.

IV,

4.

Mitteilungen dtr dcutschtn Orient- Gesellschajty 54,

p.

23 sqq.

APPENDIX.
Esarhaddon.

If,

then,

41

Ilushuma lived about

B.C.

approximate date for Sumu-abum, the founder of the

of Babylon,

is

2035,

first

automatically obtained, and the chronology can be

reckoned back to Ur-Engur without more inexactitude than

have

been

Incidentally,

already

Bur-Sin

involved
I

of

in

Ur

is

the

preceding

known ^

to

recorded rulers of Ashur.

approximation might also be

dynasty of Akshak.

But

from anything more than

it

Even beyond

made

have been the

to dates as far

MitUit,

back as the

seems better to abstain,

at present,

a possible

inquiry.
^

earliest

point a rough

this

this general sketch of

may

calculations.

contemporary and overlord of Zariku, one of the very

method of

an

dynasty

d, deutsck, Or-Gtsell,^ 54, p. 16.

new


42

ADDITIONAL NOTE.
When

the foregoing pages had already reached their final form

appeared in the Expository Times of June,

in the press, there

192 1,

p.

410, an article entitled

Akkad," to which the author,

my

attention.

make any

"The

While, therefore,

it

Dynasties of Sumer and

Langdon, very kindly

Prof.

more recent discovery of Dr. Legrain.

and

it

now known
is

to have reigned 7

is

suppUed by a

exactly with

which

that

is

given

text no. 3, Col. VIII, 5,

concerning

and 56 years

this part of the dynasty.

for

respectively,

The

the

list

of

to

further

family by

doubt remains

The gap which was assumed

and Naram-Sin does not

object of this assumption was to supply another king

who should complete

summary.

down

This number agrees

the Sargonid

and no

29) to occur between Manishtusu

exist.

still

certain that the house of Sharru-kin ruled in regular

Shar-gali-sharri, for a period of 157 years.

(p.

it

Manishtusu and Naram-

succession from father to son through five generations

Poebel's

37),

to take account of certain additional information

concerning the Dynasty of Agade, which

Sin are

and

alteration in the text of this essay (pp. 29

seemed necessary

directed

was by that time impossible to

the

number of

12 which

is

given in the

Here, therefore, the new information raises a difficulty

names

is

now

complete, but there are only eleven.

Further, the duration of the dynasty, given in the

summary

as

197, is actually 196 by addition of the individual reigns, including

the 3 years of the 4 " usurpers." As the figures for the Sargonid

house are checked by an independent summary, as mentioned

above, the inaccuracy must occur in the latter part of the dynasty.

The

deficiencies of

one king and one year are probably connected

ADDITIONAL NOTE.
phenomena, but whereas the
the loss of a
precision

name

with

is

more

which the

latter is

43

comparatively unimportant,

difficult to explain, in

text

instance,

for

states,

number of the pretenders who disputed the throne

of Shar-gali-sharri.

But

it is

the

which once beset

all

that

is

now

left

of the formidable

important period of Babylonian

this

history.

KINGDOM OF AGADE.
Sharru-kin,

...

Rimush,

Manishtusu,

Naram-Sin,

...

Shar-gali-sharri

...

Igigi

Imi

Nanum

Elulu

Dudu,
Shudurkib

exact

after the reign

indeed a matter of congratulation that

these slight uncertainties are

difficulties

view of the

(?)

...

II kings

(according to summaries)

..

...

kings

5S years.
15

S6

24

21

15

196 years,
...

197 years

PL.

1.

LIST OF EARLY DYNASTIES.

B.M. 108857. (Obverse.)

^^4<<gi^j!f^>fa:.g^]?^

m^i^S^^^

g-^^im

<Ty>^t#^^a-

isj^m^^^^

4r^

'^^^^

'^^^^
r
'M^mmWMWTW
m> ^&
^ ^j>0fi^^^^mm^:^ >^^4M.
^^^^y^>*<ll^=i: S:^><^!m-d>tX^^^M^f^
l^^lf m H^^ m=ir^ a.^ ^^T ^i^^^^^^^H^F^^^f

m^ ^p ^ fe^^aj^^^pj<l^

;..:-

gb

,vi>-'

4j;^e^t^
IS

fcffi:>H^^'gfe>ff-i^^^^m^

"^^^^

4ii:^^'-^

<T

'^^#^-

^,^^>4^

<T

^^^n

^^.l^^'i-

a#mgg;^>i-<>

_^^^|p5f
r.^^i6-*^
p^

^
p-^^

PL. 2.

LIST OF EARLY DYNASTIES.

B.M. 108857. (Reverse.)

r>^^ci

up>

^-A

^-^?

^m-M
^^^^^t^

y^ii^

^T^"

.7^7

^,^M

^P^ g:s:i?m<W^^^ g^
M^^^yg^-^^^giJ^TfT^Wai^f ^-^M

i^^s^ir^'^-^s

^^^ggg^w^

li

><

^ ^
M.^^^^

g^<f ^Jl=f<::^g::|^|f >4^JJ7'^S|i^^M^

jH^^ m^ <^} rf OT
^
fc^g^T^^
/5-

^^^UP^^

3B>4<i

tipj^^

S:f^^N>.^^

^^

tix^m

im,.

PL. 3.

INSCRIPTION ON A VOTIVE HAMMER.

B.M. 114703.

^ ^m 1\ ^ms>^^^
^^g=*^ ^ ClH^t^ png^OFPO
T^

-<^

-^

g<Qiiiiiiiiii>ri

CONE OF

LIBIT-ISHTARi.

KING OF
Col.

4=fi41:=>^
-^:...5>
IT

I8IN.

B.M. 114683

I.

^
^

MU

>fM

i^^><T

M.^T^^T

fe^><T<'f_^;li:T

^i
Col.

^^ ^ 5g^f>

m^^^O'^^^
ift^

<!^

if^mmk^i<m
^^"W^trimMm

m-j

(0

km^'m^t^'

II.

m^^is^m^m
's^m ^^w m
i?>-^
^ ^ <m^

,^

fe^ f^^-r

w^

-SeJ

fe^

fefc^-<f
-

.f >-

^T ^^

4-mW^d>^H^'
>-

if>^

fei

^ ^ ^
^^^

^fe<r

14 DAY USE
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED

LOAN

DEPT.

This book is due on the last date stamped below,

or on the date to which renewed. Renewals only:
Tel. No. 642-3405
Renewals may be made 4 days priod to date due.
Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.

ow.

fia?5(?ii)

SEP

'^ -11^

^!

9
ov'54BH

HK?b

CtRC

OW

f'W

"
ii(,

rr,Rl8^gT6 2
M_

ttcfint.

SEP

C. ciR.

/ov'54CC

Aaft'B

51976

DEC 21

..,,

1978

DEC12

1978

0EC IT
LD21A-60m-8,'70

(N88378l0)476A-32

1954 lU

General Library
University of California
Berkeley

-^19551
p'55LT

_
^ T
^^^*

"l

YA 03375

"c-iH