 |
CHAPTER X
THE DYNASTY OF UR AND THE KINGDOM OF SUMER AND AKKAD
 |
THE more
recent finds at Tello have enabled us to bridge the gap which formerly existed
in our knowledge of Chaldean history and civilization between the age of
Naram-Sin and the rise of the city of Ur under Ur-Engur (Ur Nammu), the founder of the
kingdom of Sumer and Akkad. What we now know of Lagash during this period may
probably be regarded as typical of the condition of the other great Sumerian
cities. The system of government, by means of which Shar-Gani-sharri and
Naram-Sin had exercised control over Sumer from their capital in the north, had
doubtless been maintained for a time by their successors; but, from the
absence of any trace of their influence at Tello, we cannot regard their
organization as having been equally effective. They, or the Semitic kings of
some other northern city, may have continued to exercise a general suzerainty
over the whole of Babylonia, but the records of Lagash seem to show that the
larger and more distant cities were left in the enjoyment of practical
independence. The mere existence of a suzerain, however, who had inherited the
throne or empire of Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin, must have acted as a
deterrent influence upon any ambitious prince or patesi, and would thus have
tended to maintain a condition of equilibrium between the separate states of
which that empire had been composed. We have seen that Lagash took advantage of
this time of comparative inactivity to develop her resources along peaceful
lines. She gladly returned to the condition of a compact city-state, without
dropping the intercourse with distant countries
which had
been established under the earlier Akkadian kings.
During
this period we may suppose that the city of Ur enjoyed a similar measure of
independence, which increased in proportion to the decline of Semitic authority
in the north. Gudea's campaign against Anshan affords some indication of the
capability of independent action, to which the southern cities gradually
attained. It is not likely that such initiative on the part of Lagash was
unaccompanied by a like activity within the neighbouring, and more powerful,
state of Ur. In an earlier age the twin kingdoms of Ur and Erech had dominated
southern Babylonia, and their rulers had established the kingdom of Sumer,
which took an active part in opposing the advance of Semitic influence
southwards. The subjection of Sumer by the Dynasty of Akkad put an end for a
time to all thoughts of independence on the part of separate cities, although
the expedition against Erech and Naksu, which occurred in the patesiate of
Lugal-ushumgal, supports the tradition of a revolt of all the lands in the
latter part of Sargon's reign. Ur would doubtless have been ready to lend
assistance to such a movement, and we may imagine that she was not slow to take
advantage of the gradual weakening of Akkad under her later rulers. At a time
when Gudea was marching across the Elamite border, or sending unchecked for his
supplies to the Mediterranean coast or the islands of the Persian Gulf, Ur was
doubtless organizing her own forces, and may possibly have already made
tentative efforts at forming a coalition of neighbouring states. She only
needed an energetic leader, and this she found in Ur-Engur, who succeeded in
uniting the scattered energies of Sumer and so paved the way for the more
important victories of his son.
That Ur-Engur
was the founder of his dynasty we know definitely from the dynastic chronicle,
which was recovered during the American excavations at Nippur. In this
document he is given as the first king of the Dynasty of Ur, the text merely
stating that he became king and ruled for eighteen years. Unfortunately the
preceding
columns of the text are wanting, and we do not know what dynasty was set down
in the list as preceding that of Ur, nor is any indication afforded of the
circumstances which led to Ur-Engur's accession. From his building-inscriptions
that have been recovered on different sites in Southern Babylonia it is
possible, however, to gather some idea of his achievements and the extent of
his authority. After securing the throne he appears to have directed his
attention to putting the affairs of Ur in order. In two of his
brick-inscriptions from Mukayyar, Ur-Engur bears the single title "king
of Ur", and these may therefore be assigned to the beginning of his reign,
when his kingdom did not extend beyond the limits of his native city. These
texts record the rebuilding of the temple of Nannar, the Moon-god, and the
repair and extension of the city-wall of Ur. His work on the temple of the
city-god no doubt won for him the support of the priesthood, and so
strengthened his hold upon the throne; while, by rebuilding and adding to the
fortifications of Ur, he secured his city against attack before he embarked
upon a policy of expansion.
We may
assume with some confidence that the first city over which he extended his
authority was Erech. It would necessarily have been his first objective, for by
its position it would have blocked any northward advance. The importance
attached by Ur-Engur to the occupation of this city is reflected in the title
"Lord of Erech". which precedes his usual titles upon bricks from
the temple of the Moon-god at Ur, dating from a later period of his reign; his
assumption of the title indicates that Erech was closely associated with Ur,
though not on a footing of equality. That he should have rebuilt E-anna, the
great temple of Ninni in Erech, as we learn from bricks found at Warka, was a
natural consequence of its acquisition, for by so doing he exercised his privilege
as suzerain. But he honoured the city above others which he acquired, by
installing his own son there as high priest of the goddess Ninni,
an event
which gave its official title to one of the years of his reign. We have
definite evidence that he also held the neighbouring city of Larsa, for bricks
have been found at Senkera, which record his rebuilding of the temple of
Babbar, the Sun-god. With the acquisition of Lagash, he was doubtless strong
enough to obtain the recognition of his authority throughout the whole of
Sumer.
BRICK OF
UR-ENGUR, KING OF UK, RECORDING THE REBUILDING OF THE TEMPLE OF THE GODDESS
NINNI IN THE CITY OF ERECH |
 |
The only
other city, in which direct evidence has been found of Ur-Engur's building
activity, is Nippur. From the American excavations on that site we learn that
he rebuilt E-kur, Enlil's great temple, and also that of Ninlil, his spouse. It
was doubtless on the strength of his holding Nippur that he assumed the title
of King of Sumer and Akkad. How far his authority was recognized in Akkad it is
impossible to say, but the necessity for the conquest of Babylon in Dungi's
reign would seem to imply that Ur-Engur's suzerainty over at least a part of the
country was more or less nominal. Khashkhamer, patesi of Ishkun-Sin, whose seal
is now preserved in the British Museum, was his subject, and the Semitic
character of the name of his city suggests that it lay in Northern Babylonia.
Moreover, certain tablets drawn up in his reign are dated in the year in
which King Ur-Engur took his way from the lower to the upper country", a
phrase that may possibly imply a military expedition in the north. Thus some
portions of Akkad may have been effectively held by Ur-Engur, but it is certain
that the complete subjugation of the country was only effected during Dungi's
reign.
In Sumer,
on the other hand, Ur-Engur's sway was unquestioned. His appointment of Ur-abba
as patesi of Lagash was probably characteristic of his treatment of the
southern cities: by the substitution of his own adherents in place of the
reigning patesis, he would have secured loyal support in the administration of
his dependent states. We have evidence of one of his administrative acts, so
far as Lagash is concerned. On a clay cone from Tello he records that, after he
had built the temple of Enlil, he dug a canal in honour of the Moon-god,
Nannar, which he named Nannar-gugal.
He
describes the canal as a boundary-ditch, and we may conjecture that it marked a
revision of the frontier between the territories of two cities, possibly that
between Lagash and lands belonging to the city of Ur. In the same inscription
he tells us that, in accordance with the laws of the Sun-god, he caused justice
to prevail, a claim that affords some indication of the spirit in which he
governed the cities he had incorporated in his kingdom.
In the
reign of Dungi, who succeeded his father upon the throne and inherited from him
the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad, the whole of Northern Babylonia was brought to
acknowledge the suzerainty of Ur. Considerable light has been thrown upon
Dungi's policy, and indirectly upon that of the whole of Ur-Engur's dynasty, by
the recently published chronicle concerning early Babylonian kings, to which
reference has already been made. The earlier sections of this document, dealing
with the reigns of Sargon and Naram-Sin, are followed by a short account of
Dungi's reign, from which we learn two facts of considerable significance. The
first of these is that Dungi "cared greatly for the city of Eridu, which
was on the shore of the sea," and the second is that "he sought after
evil, and the treasure of E-sagila and of Babylon he brought out as
spoil." It will be noted that the writer of the chronicle, who was
probably a priest in the temple of E-sagila, disapproved of his treatment of
Babylon, in consequence of which he states that Bel (i.e. Marduk) made an end
of him. In view of the fact that Dungi reigned for no less than fifty-eight
years and consolidated an extensive empire, it is not improbable that the evil
fate ascribed to him in the chronicle was suggested by Babylonian prejudice.
But the Babylonian colouring of the narrative does not affect the historical
value of the other traditions, but rather enhances them. For it is obvious that
the disaster to the city and to E-sagila was not an invention, and must, on the
contrary, have been of some magnitude for its record to have been preserved in
Babylon itself through later generations.
In
Dungi's treatment of Babylon, and in his profanation of the temple of its
city-god, we have striking proof that the rise of the Dynasty of Ur was
accompanied by a religious as well as a political revolution. Late tradition
retained the memory of Sargon's building activity in Babylon, and under his
successors upon the throne of Akkad the great temple of E-sagila may well have
become the most important shrine in Northern Babylonia and the centre of
Semitic worship. Eridu, on the other hand, was situated in the extreme south of
Sumer and contained the oldest and most venerated temple of the Sumerians.
Dungi's care for the latter city to the detriment of Babylon, emphasized by
contrast in the late records of his reign, suggests that he aimed at a
complete reversal of the conditions which had prevailed during the preceding
age. The time was ripe for a Sumerian reaction, and Ur-Engur's initial success
in welding the southern cities into a confederation of states under his own
suzerainty may be traced to the beginning of this racial movement. Dungi
continued and extended his father's policy, and his sack of Babylon may
probably be regarded as the decisive blow in the struggle, which had been
taking place against the last centres of Semitic influence in the north.
Other
evidence is not lacking of the Sumerian national revival, which characterized
the period of the kings of Sumer and Akkad. Of Ur-Engur's inscriptions every
one is written in Sumerian, in striking contrast to the texts which date from
the time of Shar-Gani-sharri and Naram-Sin. Of the still more numerous records
of Dungi's reign, only two short votive formulae are written in Semitic
Babylonian, and one of these is from the northern city of Cutha. The
predominant use of Sumerian also characterizes the texts of the remaining
members of Ur-Engur's dynasty and the few inscriptions of the Dynasty of Isin
that have been recovered. In fact, only one of
these is in
Semitic, a short brick-inscription giving the name and titles of Gimil-Sin,
which was found at Susa. It is true that the last three kings of the Dynasty of
Ur apparently bear Semitic names, and of the rulers of the Dynasty of Isin the
Semitic character of the majority of the names is not in doubt. But this in
itself does not prove that their bearers were Semites, and a study of the
proper names occurring in the numerous commercial documents and tablets of
accounts, which were drawn up under the kings of Ur and Isin, are invariably
Sumerian in character. A more convincing test than that of the royal names is
afforded by the cylinder-seals of the period. In these both subject and
treatment are Sumerian, resembling the seals of Lagash at the time of Gudea
and having little in common with those of the Dynasty of Akkad. Moreover, the
worshippers engraved upon the seals are Sumerians, not Semites. Two striking
examples are the seal of Khashkhamer, the contemporary and dependant of
Ur-Engur, and that which Kilulla-guzala, the son of Ur-baga, dedicated to
Meslamtaea for the preservation of Dungi's life. It will be noticed that on
each of these seals the worshipper has a shaven head and wears the fringed
Sumerian tunic. There can be little doubt, therefore, that Ur-Engur and his
descendants were Sumerians, and we may probably regard the Dynasty of Isin as a
continuation of the same racial movement which led to the establishment of the
kingdom of Sumer and Akkad.
Besides
affording information with regard to the racial characteristics of the
inhabitants of Southern Babylonia, the official lists and commercial documents
of this period indirectly throw light upon historical events. In the first
great collection of tablets found by M. de Sarzec at Tello, the majority of
those belonging to Dungi's period were dated in the later years of his reign;
but among the tablets recovered during the more recent diggings on the site are
many dated in his earlier years. The date-formulae inscribed upon these documents,
in conjunction with fragmentary date-lists, have rendered it possible to
arrange the titles of the years in order for the greater part of his reign;
and, since the years were named after important occurrences, such as the
building or inauguration of temples in different cities and the successful
prosecution of foreign campaigns, they form a valuable source of information
concerning the history of the period. From these we can gather some idea of
the steps by which Dungi increased his empire, and of the periods in his reign
during which he achieved his principal conquests. During his earlier years it
would seem that he was occupied in securing complete control within the
districts of Northern Babylonia, which he had nominally inherited from his father.
The sack of Babylon may well have been commemorated in the title for the year
in which it took place, and, if so, it must be placed within the first decade
of his reign, where a gap occurs in our sequence of the date-formulae. Such of
the earlier titles as have been recovered refer for the most part to the
building of palaces and temples, the installation of deities within their
shrines, and the like. It is not until the thirty-fourth year of his reign that
a foreign conquest is explicitly recorded.
UR-Nammu Votive Tablet |
 |
But
before this period there are indications that an expansion of Dungi's empire
was already taking place. In the nineteenth year of his reign he installed the
goddess Kadi in her temple at Der, an act which proves that the principal
frontier town on the Elamite border was at this time in his possession. In the
following year he
installed
in his temple the god Nutugmushda of Kazallu, in which we may
see evidence that
he had imposed his suzerainty over this country, the conquest
of which,
according to the late tradition, had been a notable
achievement of Sargon's
reign. In his twenty-sixth year he appointed his daughter to
be "lady" of the Elamite region of Markharshi, a record that throws an
interesting light upon the position enjoyed by women among the
Sumerians.
These districts, and others of which we have no knowledge, may
well have been
won by conquest, for it is obvious that the official
date-formulae could not
take account of every military expedition, especially in years
when an
important religious event had also taken place. But, in the
case of the three
countries referred to, it is also possible that little
opposition was offered
to their annexation, and for that reason the title of the year
may have merely
recorded Dungi's performance of his chief privilege as
suzerain, or the
appointment of his representative as ruler. Whichever
explanation be adopted,
it is clear that Dungi was already gaining possession of
regions which had
formed part of the empire of the Semitic kings of Akkad.
In
addition to acquiring their territory, Dungi also seems to have borrowed from
the Semites one of their most effective weapons, for the twenty-eighth year of
his reign was known as that in which he enrolled the sons of Ur as archers. The
principal weapon of the earlier Sumerians was the spear, and they delivered
their attack in close formation, the spearmen being protected in line of battle
by heavy shields carried by shield-bearers. For other purposes of offence they
depended chiefly on the battle-axe and possibly the dart, but these were
subsidiary weapons, fitted rather for the pursuit of a flying enemy when once
their main attack had been delivered. Eannatum's victories testify to the
success achieved by the method of attack in heavy phalanx against an enemy with
inferior arms. The bow appears to have been introduced by the Semites, and they
may have owed their success in battle largely to its employment: it would have
enabled them to break up and demoralize the serried ranks of the Sumerians,
before they could get to close quarters.
Dungi
doubtless recognized the advantage the weapon would give his own forces,
especially when fighting in a hilly country, where the heavy spear and shield
would be of little service, and it would be difficult to retain a close
formation. We may conjecture that he found his companies of bowmen of
considerable assistance in the series of successful campaigns, which he carried
out in Elam and the neighbouring regions, during the latter half of his reign.
Shulgi (Dungi) Votive Tablet |
 |
Of these
campaigns we know that the first conquest of Gankhar took place in Dungi's
thirty-fourth year, and that of Simuru in the year that followed. The latter
district does not appear to have submitted tamely to annexation, for in his
thirty-sixth year Dungi found it necessary to send a fresh expedition for its
reconquest. In the following year he followed up these successes by the
conquest of Kharshi and Khumurti. Gankhar and Simuru were probably situated in
the mountainous districts to the east of the Tigris, around the upper course of
the Diyala, in the neighbourhood of Lulubu; for the four countries Urbillu,
Simuru, Lulubu, and Gankhar formed the object of a single expedition undertaken
by Dungi in his fifty-fifth year. Kharshi, or Kharishi, appears to have
also lain in the region to the east of the Tigris. These victories doubtless
led to the submission of other districts, for in his fortieth year Dungi
married one of his daughters to the patesi of Anshan, among the most important
of Elamite states. The warlike character of the Elamites is attested by the
difficulty Dungi experienced in retaining control over these districts, after
they had been incorporated in his empire. For in the forty-first year of his
reign he was obliged to undertake the reconquest of Gankhar, and to send a
third expedition there two years later; in the forty-third year he subdued
Simuru for the third time, while in the forty-fourth year Anshan itself
revolted and had to be regained by force of arms.
In the
course of these ten years it is probable that Dungi annexed the greater part of
Elam, and placed his empire upon an enduring basis. It is true that during the
closing years of his reign he undertook a fresh series of expeditions,
conquering Shashru in the fifty-second year, subduing Simuru and Lulubu in the
fifty-fourth year for the ninth time, and Urbillu, Kimash, Khumurti
and Kharshi in the course of his last four years. But the earlier victories, by
means of which he extended his sway far beyond the borders of Sumer and Akkad,
may be held to mark the principal era of expansion in the growth of his
empire. It was probably during this period that he added to his other titles
the more comprehensive one of "king of the four quarters (of the
world)," thus reviving a title which had already been adopted by Naram-Sin
at a time when the empire of Akkad had reached its zenith. Another innovation
which Dungi introduced in the course of his reign, at a period it would seem
shortly before his adoption of Naram-Sin's title, was the assumption of divine
rank, indicated by the addition of the determinative for divinity before his
name. Like Naram-Sin, who had claimed to be the god of Akkad, he styled himself
the god of his land, and he founded temples in which his statue became the
object of a public cult. He also established a national festival in his own
honour, and renamed the seventh month of the year, during which it was
celebrated, as the Month of the Feast of Dungi. He appears to have been the
first Sumerian ruler to claim divine honours. By so doing he doubtless
challenged comparison with the kings of Akkad, whose empire his conquests had
enabled him to rival.
Dungi's
administration of the Elamite provinces of his empire appears to have been of a
far more permanent character than that established by any earlier conqueror
from Babylonia. In the course of this history we have frequently noted
occasions on which Elam has come into contact with the centres of civilization
in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates. In fact, from her geographical
position, she was not only the
nearest
foreign neighbour of Sumer and Akkad, but she was bound to influence them and
be influenced by them in turn. To the earlier Sumerian rulers Elam was a name
of terror, associated with daring raids across the Tigris on the part of hardy
mountain races. The Semitic kings of Kish had turned the tables by invading
Elamite territory, and their conquests and those of the kings of Akkad had
opened the way for the establishment of close commercial relations between the
two countries. Although their expeditions may have been undertaken with the
object of getting spoil rather than of acquiring territory, there is no doubt
that they resulted in a considerable Semitic immigration into the country.
Moreover, the Semitic conquerors brought with them the civilization they had
themselves acquired. For their memorial and monumental records the native princes
of Elam adopted from their conquerors the cuneiform system of writing and even
their Semitic language, though the earlier native writing continued to be
employed for the ordinary purposes of life. Basha-Shushinak, patesi of
Susa and governor of Elam, who may probably be placed at a rather earlier
period than the Dynasty of Ur, employs the Semitic Babylonian language for
recording his votive offerings, and he not only calls down Shushinak's
vengeance upon the impious, but adds invocations to such purely Babylonian
deities as Shamash, Nergal, Enlil, Enki or Ea, Sin, Ninni or Ishtar, and
Ninkharsag. We could not have more striking evidence of the growth of Semitic
influence in Elam during the period which followed the Elamite victories of the
kings of Kish and Akkad.
Close
commercial relations were also maintained between Elam and Sumer, and Gudea's
conquest of Anshan may be regarded as the first step towards the Sumerian
domination of the country. In establishing his own authority in Elam, Dungi must
have found many districts, and especially the city of Susa, influenced by
Sumerian culture, though chiefly through the medium of Semitic immigrants from
Northern Babylonia. His task of administering the conquered provinces was thus
rendered proportionately easier. That his expeditions were not merely raids,
but resulted in the permanent occupation of the country, is proved by a number
of tablets found at Tello, which throw considerable light upon the methods by
which he administered the empire from his capital at Ur. Many of these
documents contain orders for supplies allotted to officials in the king's
service, who were passing through Lagash in the course of journeys between Ur
and their districts in Elam. The tablets enumerate quantities of grain, strong
drink and oil, which had been assigned to them, either for their sustenance
during their stay in Lagash, or as provision for their journey after their
departure.
It is
interesting to note that the towns or countries, from which they came, or to
which they set out on their return journey from Ur, are generally specified. In
addition to Susa, we meet with the names of Anshan, Kharishi, Kimash and
Markharshi, the conquest or annexation of which by Dungi, as we have already
seen, is recorded in the date-formulae. Other places, the officials of which
are mentioned, were Ivhukhnuri, Shimash, Sabu, Ulu, Urri, Zaula, Gisha, Siri,
Siu, Nekhune, and Sigiresh. Like the preceding districts, these were all in
Elam, while Az, Shabara, Simashgi, Makhar and Adamdun, with which other
officers were connected, probably lay in the same region. From the number of
separate places, the names of which have already been recovered on the tablets
from Tello, it is clear that Dungi's authority in Elam was not confined to a few
of the principal cities, but was effectively established throughout the greater
part of the country. While much of his administrative work was directed from
Ur, it is probable that Susa formed his local capital. From inscriptions found
during the French excavations on that site we know that Dungi rebuilt there the
temple of Shushinak the national god, and it may be inferred that he made
the city
his headquarters during his periods of residence in the country.
The
functions of many of the officials it is difficult to determine, but some of
the titles that can be explained include couriers and royal messengers, who
were entrusted with despatches. In the case of officials of a higher grade the
object of their mission is sometimes indicated on the tablet, and it is seen
that the majority superintended the collection and distribution of supplies,
the transport of building materials, and the provision of labour for the public
works undertaken by the king. In fact, a very large number of the royal
officers were employed in recruiting public slaves in Elam, and in transporting
them to Ur and other cities, for work upon temples and palaces in course of
construction. From the situation of Lagash on the highroad between Ur and
Susa, it is natural that the majority of the officials mentioned on the tablets
should be on their way to or from Elam, but some whose business lay in other
directions are occasionally mentioned. Thus certain of them were from towns in
the immediate neighbourhood of Lagash, such as Tig-abba, while others journeyed
northward to Nippur. Others, again, were on their way south to the coast, and
even to the island of Dilmun in the Persian Gulf.
Warad Sin, Brother of Rim Sin, votive tablet |
 |
Among the
higher officials whose stay in Lagash is recorded, or whose representatives
passed through the city on business, a prefect, a local governor, and even a
patesi are sometimes mentioned, and from this source of information we learn the
names of some of the patesis who ruled in Susa under the suzerainty of Dungi
and his successors on the throne of Ur. Thus several of the tablets record the
supply of rations for Urkium, patesi of Susa, on his way back to that city
during Dungi's reign. Another tablet mentions a servant of Zarik, patesi of
Susa, who had come from Nippur, while a third patesi of Susa, who owed
allegiance to one of the later kings of Ur, was Beli-arik. It
is
noteworthy that these names, like that of Lipum, patesi of Anshan, who is also
mentioned, are not Elamite but Semitic Babylonian, while Ur-gigir and Nagidda,
who were patesis of Adamdun during this period, are Sumerian. It is therefore
clear that, on his conquest of Elam, Dungi deposed the native rulers and
replaced them by officials from Babylonia, a practice continued by his
successors on the throne. In this we may see conclusive evidence of the
permanent and detailed control over the administration of the country, which
was secured by the later kings of Ur. Such a policy no doubt resulted in a very
effective system of government, but its success depended on the maintenance of
a sufficient force to overawe any signs of opposition. That the Elamites
themselves resented the foreign domination is clear from the number of military
expeditions, which were required to stamp out rebellions and reconquer
provinces in revolt. The harsh methods adopted by the conquerors were not
calculated to secure any loyal acceptance of their rule on the part of the
subject race, and to this cause we may probably trace the events which led not
only to the Elamite revival but to the downfall of the Dynasty of Ur itself.
It is
clear that Elam under Dungi's administration formed a rich source of supply for
those material products, in the lavish display of which the later rulers of
Sumer loved to indulge. Her quarries, mines, and forests were laid under
contribution, and her cities were despoiled of their accumulated wealth in the
course of the numerous military expeditions by which her provinces were
overrun. From the spoil of his campaigns Dungi was enabled to enrich the
temples of his own land, and by appropriating the products of the country he
obtained an abundance of metal, stone and wood for the construction and
adornment of his buildings. Large bodies of public slaves supplied the
necessary labour, and their ranks were constantly recruited from among the
captives taken in battle, and from towns and villages which were suspected of
participation in revolts. He was thus enabled to continue, on an even more
elaborate scale, the rebuilding of the
ancient
temples of his country, which had been inaugurated by his father, Ur-Engur.
Among the
cities of Akkad we know that at Cutha he rebuilt E-meslam, the great temple of
Nergal, the city-god, but it is from Sumer that the principal evidence of his
building activity has come. The late tradition that he greatly favoured the
city of Eridu is supported by a votive text in the British Museum, which
records his restoration of Enki's temple in that city; moreover, under Dungi,
the chief priest of Eridu enjoyed a position of great favour and influence.
Another city in the south, in which he undertook large building-operations, was
Erech; here he restored E-anna, the temple of the goddess Ninni, and built a
great wall, probably in connection with the city's system of defence. We know
few details concerning the condition of these cities, but the wealth enjoyed by
the temples of Lagash may be regarded as typical of the other great Sumerian
religious centres during Dungi's reign. Among the baked clay tablets from Tello
which date from this period are extensive lists of cattle, sheep, and asses, owned
by the temples, and detailed tablets of accounts concerning the administration
of the rich temple lands. It is interesting to note that these documents, which
from the nature of their clay and the beauty of their writing are among the
finest specimens yet recovered in Babylonia, were found by M. de Sarzec in the
original archive-chambers in which, they had been stored by the Sumerian
priests. Though they had apparently been disturbed at some later period, the
majority were still arranged in layers, placed one upon the other, upon benches
of earth which ran along both sides of narrow subterranean galleries.
In spite
of Dungi's devotion to the ancient Sumerian cult of Enki in the south, he did
not neglect Nippur, though he seems to have introduced some novelties in the
relations he maintained with this central shrine of Babylonia. In the fifteenth
year of his reign he appears to have emphasized the political connection
between Nippur and the capital, and six years later he dedicated
a local
sanctuary to the Moon-god at the former city, in which he installed a statue of
Nannar, the city-god of Ur. Enlil and his consort Ninlil were not deposed from
their place at the head of the Sumerian pantheon; the Moon-god, as the patron
deity of the suzerain city, was merely provided with a local centre of worship
beside E-kur, the great temple of his father. Indeed, under Dungi's successors
Enlil enjoyed a position of enhanced importance; but it is possible that with
Nannar the same process of evolution was at this time beginning to take place,
which at a later period characterized the rise in importance of Marduk, the
city-god of Babylon. But the short duration of the Dynasty of Ur did not give
time for the development of the process beyond its initial stages. At Nippur
Dungi also built a temple in honour of the goddess Damgalnunna, and we possess
a cylinder-seal which Ur-nabbad, a patesi of Nippur, dedicated to Nusku,
Enlil's chief minister, on behalf of Dungi's life. Ur-nabbad describes himself
as the son of Lugal-ezendug, to whom he also assigns the title of patesi of
Nippur. It is probable that at Nippur the office of patesi continued to be
hereditary, in spite of political changes, a privilege it doubtless enjoyed in
virtue of its peculiarly sacred character.
In his
capital at Ur it was but natural that Dungi should still further enlarge the
great temple which Ur-Engur had erected in honour of the Moon-god, and it was
probably in Ur also that he built a temple in honour of Ninib, whose cult he
particularly favoured. He also erected two royal palaces there, one of them,
E-kharsag, in the eighteenth year of his reign, and the other, E-khalbi, three
years later. In Ur, too, we obtain evidence of an important administrative
reform, by the recovery of three weights for half a maneh, two manehs, and
twelve manehs respectively. The inscription upon one of these states that it
had been tested and passed as of full weight in the sealing-house dedicated to
Nannar. Dungi, in fact, introduced a uniform standard of weights for use in at
least the Babylonian portion of his empire; and he sought to render his
enactments with regard to them effective, by
establishing
an offical testing-house at Ur, which was probably attached to the temple of
the Moon-god and conducted under the direction of the central priesthood. Here
the original standards were preserved, and all local standards that were
intended for use in other cities had no doubt to be attested by the official
inscription of the king. It may be added that, in addition to the weights of
his own period that have been recovered, a copy of one has survived, which was
made after his standard in the Neo-Babylonian period.
A
considerable part of our knowledge of Dungi's reign has been derived from the
tablets found at Tello, and from them we also obtain indirect evidence of the
uniform character of his system of administration. As he introduced a fixed
standard of weight for use throughout Babylonia, so he applied a single system
of time-reckoning, in place of the local systems of dating, which had, until
the reign of his father, prevailed in the different cities since the fall of
the Dynasty of Akkad. The official title for each year was fixed in Ur, and was
then published in each city of his empire, where it was adopted as the correct
formula. This change had already been begun by Ur-Engur, who had probably
introduced the central system into each city over which he obtained control;
with Dungi we may infer that it became universal, not only throughout Sumer and
Akkad, but also in the outlying provinces of his empire. In the provincial
cities the scribes frequently added to the date-formula the name of their local
patesi, who was in office at the time, and from such notes upon the Tello
tablets we obtain the names of four patesis of Lagash who were Dungi's
contemporaries during the last twenty years he occupied the throne. Similarly
on tablets found at Jokha we learn that in the forty-fourth year of Dungi's
reign Ur-nesu was patesi of the city of Umma; while a seal-impression on
another tablet from Tello supplies the name of Ur-Pasag, who was patesi of the
city of Dungi-Babbar. The sealings upon tablets of the period afford some
indication of the decrease in influence attaching to the
office of
patesi, which resulted from the centralization of authority in Ur. Subordinate
officials could employ Dungi's name, not that of their local patesi, upon their
seals of office, proving that, like the patesi himself, they held their
appointments direct from the king.
Of the
patesis who held office in Lagash during Dungi's earlier years, the name of
only one, a certain Galu-kazal, has been recovered. He dedicated a vase to
Ningirsu for the preservation of Dungi's life, and his daughter Khala-Lama
presented a remarkable female statuette to the goddess Bau with the same
object. Of the later patesis we know that Galu-andul was in office during the
thirty-ninth year of Dungi's reign, and that Ur-Lama I ruled for at least
seven years from his forty-second to his forty-eighth year. The patesiate of
Alla, who was in office during his fiftieth year, was very short, for he was
succeeded in the following year by Ur-Lama II, who survived Dungi and
continued to rule in Lagash for three, and possibly four, years of Bur-Sin's
reign. Among the public works undertaken by Dungi in Lagash, we know that he
rebuilt E-ninnu, Ningirsu's temple, the great temple dedicated to the goddess
Nina, and E-salgilsa, the shrine of the goddess Ninmar in Girsu. Excavations
upon other sites will doubtless reveal traces of the other buildings, which he
erected in the course of his long reign of fifty-eight years. Indeed, the texts
already recovered contain references to work on buildings, the sites of which
are not yet identified, such as the restoration of Ubara, and the founding of Bad-mada,
"The Wall (or Fortification) of the Land". As the latter was
constructed in his forty-seventh year, after the principal epoch of his Elamite
campaigns, it may have been a strongly fortified garrison-town upon the
frontier, from which he could exercise control over his recently acquired
provinces.
In view
of Dungi's exceptionally long reign, it is probable that Bur-Sin was already
advanced in years when he succeeded his father upon the throne of Ur.
However
this may be, he reigned for only nine years, and Gimil-Sin, his son who
succeeded him, for only seven years. A longer reign was that of Ibi-Sin,
Gimil-Sin's son and successor, who held his throne for a generation, but
finally lost it and brought Ur-Engurs dynasty to an inglorious end. These last
rulers of the Dynasty of Ur appear to have maintained the general lines of
Dungi's policy, which they inherited from him along with his empire. The
Elamite provinces required to be kept in check by the sending of military
expeditions thither, but in Babylonia itself the rule of Ur was accepted
without question, and her kings were free to devote themselves to the adornment
of the great temples in the land. It is of interest to note that under Bur-Sin
and his son the importance of the central shrine of Nippur was fully
recognized, and emphasis was laid on Enlil's position at the head of the
Babylonian pantheon. Evidence of this may be seen in the additional titles, which
these two rulers adopted in their foundation-inscriptions and votive texts that
have come down to us. Bur-Sin's regular titles of "King of Ur, king of
the four quarters" are generally preceded by the phrase "whose name
Enlil has pronounced in Nippur, who raised the head of Enlil's temple",
while Gimil-Sin describes himself as "the beloved of Enlil",
"whom Enlil has chosen as his heart's beloved", or "whom Enlil
in his heart has chosen to be the shepherd of the land and of the four
quarters". From inscriptions found at Nippur we know that Bur-Sin added to
the great temple of E-kur, and also built a storehouse for offerings of honey,
butter and wine, while his third year was dated by the construction of a great
throne in Enlil's honour. Gimil-Sin appears to have been equally active in his
devotion to the shrine, for two years of his short reign derive their titles
from the setting up of a great stele and the construction of a sacred boat,
both in honour of Enlil and his consort.
The
peculiar honour paid to Enlil does not appear to have affected the cult of the
Moon-god, the patron
deity of
Ur, for both Bur-Sin and Gimil-Sin rebuilt and added to the great temple of
Sin, or Nannar, in their capital. They also followed Dungi in his care for
the shrine of Enki at Eridu; and there is evidence that Bur-Sin rebuilt the
temple of Ninni at Erech, while the last year of Gimil-Sin's reign was
signalized by the rebuilding of the city-temple at Umma. It is thus clear that
the later members of Ur-Engur's dynasty continued the rebuilding of the temples
of Babylonia, which characterized his reign and that of Dungi. Another
practice which they inherited was the deification of the reigning king. Not
only did they assume the divine determinative before their names, but Bur-Sin
styles himself "the righteous god of his land", or "the
righteous god, the sun of his land". He also set up a statue of himself,
which he named "Bur-Sin, the beloved of Ur", and placed it in the
temple of the Moon-god under the protection of Nannar and Ningal. It would seem
that it became the custom at this time for the reigning king to erect statues
of himself in the great temples of the land, where regular offerings were made
to them as to the statues of the gods themselves. Thus a tablet from Tello
mentions certain offerings made at the Feast of the New Moon to statues of
Gimil-Sin, which stood in the two principal temples of Lagash, those of
Ningirsu and the goddess Bau. It should be added that the tablet is dated
in the fifth year of Gimil-Sin's reign. In view of Nannar's rank as god of the
suzerain city, the Feasts of the New Moon were naturally regarded, even in the
provincial cities, as of peculiar importance in the sacred calendar.
Whenever
the king rebuilt or added to a temple we may assume that he inaugurated there a
new centre of his cult, but it is certain that temples were also erected which
were devoted entirely to his worship. Thus Dungi dated a year of his reign by
the appointment of a high-priest of his own cult, an act which suggests that on
his assumption of divine rank he founded a temple in his own honour. Moreover,
under his successors
high
officials sought the royal favour by building and dedicating shrines to the
reigning king. This is proved by a votive inscription of Lugal-magurri, the
patesi of Ur and commander of the fortress, which records that he founded a
temple in honour of Gimil-Sin, "his god". At the king's death his
cult did not die with him, but he continued to be worshipped and offerings were
made to him at the Feast of the New Moon. Tablets from Tello, dated during the
later years of the Dynasty of Ur, record the making of such offerings to Dungi,
and it is noteworthy that the patesis Ur-Lama and Gudea were also honoured in
the same way. We have seen that Gudea was probably not deified in his own
lifetime, but at this period he takes his place beside the god Dunpae in the
rites of the New Moon. Offerings in his honour, accompanied by sacrifices, were
repeated six times a year, and a special class of priests was attached to his
service. An interesting survival, or trace, of this practice occurs in an
explanatory list of gods, drawn up for Ashur-bani-pal's Library at Nineveh,
where Bur-Sin's name is explained as that of an attendant deity in the service
of the Moon-god.
The later
kings of Ur appear to have retained possession of the empire acquired by Dungi,
but we may assume that, like him, they were constantly obliged to enforce their
authority. Tablets have been found at Susa dated by the official formulae of
Bur-Sin, proving that the capital of Elam remained under his control, but, before
he had been two years upon the throne, he was obliged to undertake the
reconquest of Urbillu. Other successful expeditions were made in his sixth and
seventh years, which resulted in the subjugation of Shashru and Khukhunuri, or
Khukhnuri. The date- ormulae of Gimil-Sin's reign record that he conquered
Simanu in his third year, and four years later the land of Zabshali, while the
only conquest of Ibi-Sin of which we possess a record is that of Simuru. A
date-formula of this period also commemorates the marriage of the patesi of
Zabshali to Tukin-khatti-migrisha, the
daughter
of the king, but it not certain to which reign this event should be
assigned. Evidence of the extent of Gimil-Sin's authority in the direction of
the Mediterranean may be seen in the date-formula for his fourth year, which
commemorates his building of the Wall, or Fortification, of the West, entitled
Murik-Tidnim. Since Tidnu was explained by the Assyrian geographers as another
name for Amurru and may be connected with Tidanu, the mountain in Amurru from
which Gudea obtained his marble, we may infer that at least a portion of Syria
acknowledged the suzerainty of Ur during his reign.
Of the
comparatively long reign of Ibi-Sin, and of the events which preceded the
downfall of the Dynasty of Ur, we know little, but already during the reigns of
his predecessors it is possible to trace some of the causes which led to the
decline of the city's power. The wealth obtained from the Elamite provinces and
the large increase in the number of public slaves must have introduced an
element of luxury into Sumerian life, which would tend to undermine the
military qualities of the people and their inclination for foreign service. The
incorporation of Sumer and Akkad into a single empire had broken down the last
traces of political division between the great cities of the land, and, while
it had put an end to local patriotism, it had not encouraged in its place the
growth of any feeling of loyalty to the suzerain city. All the great provincial
towns were doubtless required to furnish contingents for the numerous military
campaigns of the period, and they could have had little satisfaction in seeing
the fruits of their conquests diverted to the aggrandizement of a city other
than their own. The assumption of divine rank by the later kings of Ur may in
itself be regarded as a symptom of the spirit which governed their
administration. In the case of Dungi the innovation had followed the sudden
expansion of his empire, and its adoption had been based upon political as
much as upon personal grounds. But with his descendants the practice had been
carried to more extravagant lengths, and it undoubtedly afforded
opportunities
for royal favourities to obtain by flattery an undue influence in the state.
 |
We
have
already seen that Lugal-magurri, who combined the civil office
of patesi of Ur
with the military appointment of commander of the fortress,
founded a temple
for the worship of Gimil-Sin, and it is clear that such an act
would have
opened an easier road to the royal favour than the successful
prosecution of a
campaign. It was probably by such methods that ministers at the
court of Ur
secured the enjoyment of a plurality of offices, which had
previonsly been
administered with far greater efficiency in separate hands. The
most striking
example is afforded by Arad-Nannar, whose name as that of a
patesi of Lagash
is frequently mentioned upon dated tablets from Tello. He was
"sukkal-makh," or chief minister, under the last three kings of Ur, and
appears
to have succeeded his father Ur-Dunpae, who had held this post
in Dungi's
reign. From the Tello tablets we know that he also held the
patesiate of Lagash
during this period, for he received the appointment towards the
end of
Bur-Sin's reign 1 and continued to hold it under Ibi-Sin. But
the patesiate of
Lagash was only one of many posts which he combined. For two
gate-sockets have
been found at Tello, which originally formed parts of a temple
founded in Girsu
by Arad-Nannar for the cult of Gimil-Sin, and in the
inscriptions upon them he
has left us a list of his appointments.
In
addition to holding the posts of chief minister and patesi of Lagash, he was
also priest of Enki, governor of Uzargarshana, governor of Babishue, patesi of
Sabu and of the land of Gutebu, governor of Timat-Enlil, patesi of
Al-Gimil-Sin, governor of Urbillu, patesi of Khamasi and of Gankhar, governor
of Ikhi, and governor of the Su-people and of the land of Kardaka. At some time
during the reign of Gimil-Sin Arad-Nannar thus combined in his own person
twelve
important
appointments, involving the administration of no less than thirteen separate
cities and provinces. The position of some of the places enumerated is still
uncertain, but it is clear that several were widely separated from one another.
While Lagash, for instance, lay in the south of Sumer, Sabu was in Elam and
Urbillu and Gankhar more to the north in the region of the Zagros mountains.
This
centralization of authority under the later kings of Ur undoubtedly destroyed
the power attaching to the patesiate at a time when the separate cities of the
land had enjoyed a practical autonomy; and it incidentally explains the
survival of the title, under the First Dynasty of Babylon, as that of a
comparatively subordinate class of officials. But the policy of centralization
must have had a more immediate effect on the general administration of the
empire. For it undoubtedly lessened the responsibilities of local governors,
and it placed the central authority, which the king himself had previously
enjoyed, in the hands of a few officials of the court. The king's deification
undoubtedly tended to encourage his withdrawal from the active control of
affairs, and, so long as his divine rites were duly celebrated, he was probably
content to accept without question the reports his courtiers presented to him.
Such a system of government was bound to end in national disaster, and it is
not surprising that the dynasty was brought to an end within forty-one years
of Dungi's death. We may postpone until the next chapter an account of the
manner in which the hegemony in Babylonia passed from the city of Ur to Isin.
CHAPTER
XI
|
