 |
READING HALLTHE DOORS OF WISDOM |
 |
 |
 |
 |
A HISTORY OF SUMER AND AKKADCHAPTER IV THE EARLIEST SETTLEMENTS IN SUMER; THE DAWN OF HISTORY AND THE RISE OF LAGASH
IN their origin the great cities of Babylonia were little more than collections of rude huts constructed at first of reeds cut in the marshes, and gradually giving place to rather more substantial buildings of clay and sundried brick. From the very beginning it would appear that the shrine of the local god played an important part in the foundation and subsequent development of each centre of population. Of the prehistoric period in Babylonia we know little, but it may be assumed that, already at the time of the Sumerian immigration, rude settlements had been formed around the cult-centres of local gods. This, at any rate, was the character of each town or city of the Sumerians themselves during the earliest periods to which we can trace back their history. At Fara, the most primitive Sumerian site that has yet been examined, we find the god Shuruppak giving his own name to the city around his shrine, and Ningirsu of Lagash dominates and directs his people from the first. Other city-gods, who afterwards became powerful deities in the Babylonian pantheon, are already in existence, and have acquired in varying degrees their later characters. Enki of Eridu is already the god of the deep, the shrine of Enzu or Nannar in the city of Ur is a centre of the moon-cult, Babbar of Larsa appears already as a sun-god and the dispenser of law and justice, while the most powerful Sumerian goddess, Ninni or Nana of Erech, already has her shrine and worshippers in the city of her choice. By what steps the city-gods acquired their later characters it is impossible now to say, but we may assume that the process was a gradual one. In the earlier stages of its history the character of the
local god, like that
of his city, must have been far more simple and primitive than it appears to us as seen in the light of its later development. The authority
of each god did
not extend beyond the limits of his own people's territory. Each city was content to do battle on his behalf, and the defeat of one was synonymous with the downfall of the other. With the gradual amalgamation of the cities into larger states, the
god of the
predominant city would naturally take precedence over those of the conquered
or dependent towns, and to the subsequent process of adjustment we may probably trace the relationships between the different deities and the growth of a pantheon. That Enki should have been the god of the deep from the beginning
is natural enough in view of Eridu's position on an expanse of water connected with the Persian Gulf. But how it came about that Ur was the centre of a moon-cult, or that Sippar in the north and Larsa in
the south were
peculiarly associated with the worship of the sun, are questions which cannot as yet be answered, though it is probable that future excavations on
their sites may
throw some light upon the subject.
In the case of one city excavation has already enabled us to trace the
gradual growth of its temple and the surrounding habitations during a
considerable portion of their history. The city of Nippur stands in a peculiar
relation to others in Sumer and Akkad, as being the central shrine in the two
countries and the seat of Enlil, the chief of the gods. Niffer, or Nuffar, is
the name by which the mounds marking its site are still known. They have been
long deserted, and, like the sites of many other ancient cities in Babylonia
and Assyria, no modern town or village is built upon them or in their immediate
neighbourhood. The nearest small town is Suk el-Afej, about four miles to the
south, lying on the eastern edge of the Afej marshes, which begin to the south
of Niffer and stretch away to the west. The nearest large town is Diwaniya, on
the left bank of the Euphrates twenty miles to the south-west.
In the summer the marshes in the neighbourhood of the mounds consist of pools of water connected by channels through the reed-beds, but in the
spring, when the snows have melted in the Taurus and the mountains of Kurdistan, the flood-water converts
the marshes into a
vast lagoon, and all that meets the eye are isolated date-palms and a few small hamlets built on rising knolls above the water-level.
Although, during the floods, Niffer is at times nearly isolated, the water never approaches within a considerable distance of the actual mounds. This is not due to any natural configuration of the soil, but to the fact that around the inner city, the site of which is marked by the mounds, there was built an outer ring of habitations at a time when the enclosed town of the earlier periods became too small to contain the growing population. The American excavations, which have been conducted on the site between the years 1889 and 1900, have shown that the earliest area of habitation was far more restricted than the mounds which cover the inner city.
The
excavations on the site of Nippur and its temple have illustrated the
gradual increase in the size of a
Sumerian city, and the manner in which the temple of the city-god
retained its position as the central
and most important building. The diggings, however, have thrown little light upon the form the temple
assumed during periods anterior to the Dynasty of Ur. In fact, we do not
yet know the form or arrangement
of an early Sumerian temple; for on early sites such as Fara,
Surghul, and Bismaya, the remains of no
important building were uncovered, while thescanty remains of
Ningirsu's temple at Tello date from the
On the latter site,
however, a number of earlier constructions have been discovered, and, although
they are not of a purely religious character, they may well have been employed in connection with the temple service. Apart
from private dwellings, they are the only buildings of the early Sumerians
that have as yet been recovered,
and they forcibly illustrate the primitivecharacter of the cities of this time.
The
earliest written records of the Sumerians which we possess, apart from
those engraved upon stone and of a
purely votive character, concern the sale and donation of land, and they
prove that certain customs were
already in vogue with regard to the transfer of property, which we meet
with again in later historical periods.
A few such tablets of rounded form and fashioned
of unburnt clay were found at Lagash on Tell K, and slightly below the
level of Ur-Nina's building; they may thus be assigned to a period anterior to his reign. Others of the same rounded form, but of
baked clay, have been found at Shuruppak. It is a significant fact that
several of these documents, after describing
the amount of land sold and recording the principal price that was paid for it, enumerate a number of supplementary presents made by the buyer to the seller and his associates. The presents consist of oxen, oil, wool and cloth, and precisely similar gifts are recorded on the Obelisk of Manishtusu. It would thus appear that even in this early period the system of land tenure was already firmly established, which prevailed in both Sumer and Akkad under the earlier historical rulers.
From the Shuruppak tablets we also learn the names of a number of early rulers or officials of that city, in whose reigns or periods of office the documents were drawn up. Among the names recovered are those of Ur-Ninpa, Kanizi and Mash-Shuruppak, but they are given no titles on the tablets, and it is impossible to say whether their office preceded that of the patesi, or whether they were magistrates of the city who were subordinate to a ruler of higher rank. Another of these early deeds of sale is inscribed, not upon a tablet, but on the body of a black stone statuette that has been found at Tello. From the text we learn that the buyer of the property was a certain Lupad, and the figure is evidently intended to represent him. Although it was found on the site of Lagash, and the text records a purchase of land in that city, it is remarkable that Lupad is described as a high official of the neighbouring city of Umma, which was the principal rival of Lagash during the greater part of its history. The archaic character of the sculpture, and the early form of writing upon it, suggest a date not much later than that of Ur-Nina, so that we must suppose the transaction took place at a period when one of the two rival cities acknowledged the suzerainty of the other. Unlike other Sumerian figures that have been recovered, Lupad's head has a slight ridge over the brow and below the cheek-bones. This has been explained by Heuzey as representing short hair and beard, but it more probably indicates the limits of those portions of the head and face that were shaved. Thus Lupad presents no exception to the general Sumerian method of treating the hair.
In order to assign a date to such figures as that of Lupad, it is necessary, in the absence of other evidence, to be guided entirely by the style of the sculpture and the character of the writing. Several such figures of archaic Sumerian type have been recovered, and three of them represent kings who ruled in different cities at this early period. The finest of these is a standing figure of Esar, King of Adab, which was found in the course of the American excavations at Bismaya, and is now preserved in the Imperial Ottoman Museum at Constantinople. Its discoverers claimed that it was the earliest example of Sumerian sculpture known, but it may be roughly placed at about the time of Ur-Nina's dynasty. A second king is represented by two fragments of a statuette from Tello, inscribed in archaic characters with a dedicatory text of E-abzu, King of Urama, while the third is a seated figure of a king of the northern city or district of Maer, or Mari, and is preserved in the British Museum. The same uncertainty applies to the date of Ur-Enlil, a patesi of Nippur, whose name is mentioned on one of the fragments of votive vases from that city which were found together on the south-east side of the temple-tower. As in the case of Esar, King of Adab,we can only assign these rulers approximately to the period of the earlier rulers of Lagash. It is in the city of Lagash
that our knowledge of Sumerian history may be said to begin. The excavation of the site has yielded an abundance
of material from which
it is possible to arrange
her rulers for long
periods in chronological order, and to reconstruct the part they played in conflicts between
the early city-states.
It is true that some
of her earlier kings and
patesis remain little more
than names to us, but
with the accession of Ur-Nina
we enter a period
in which our knowledge
of events is continuous,
so far at least as the
fortunes of the city were
concerned. With the
growth of her power it is also possible to trace in some detail the relations
she maintained with other great
cities in the land.
At the
earliest period of which we have any historical records it would appear
that the city of Kish exercised a
suzerainty over Sumer. Here there ruled at this time a king named Mesilim,
to whom Lagash, and probably
other great cities in the south, owed allegiance. During his reign a certain
Lugal-shag-engur was patesi of
Lagash, and we have definite record that he acknowledged Mesilim's supremacy.
For a votive
mace-head of colossal size has
been found at Tello, which bears
an inscription stating that it was
dedicated to Ningirsu by Mesilim,
who had restored his great
temple at Lagash during the
time that Lugal-shag-engur was
patesi of that city. The text,
the brevity of which is characteristic of these early votive inscriptions, consists of
but a few words,
and reads : "Mesilim, King of
Kish, the builder of the temple of Ningirsu, deposited this mace-head (for) Ningirsu
(at the time
when) Lugal-shag-engur (was)
patesi of Lagash". In spite of its
brevity the importance of the
inscription is considerable, since
it furnishes a synchronism between
two early rulers of Sumer and
the North.
The
weapon itself, upon which it is
engraved, is also noteworthy. As may
be inferred from its colossal size the mace was never intended for actual use in
battle, but was sculptured by Mesilim's
orders with the special object of being dedicated in the temple of the god. It
is decorated with rudely-carved
figures of lions, which run around it and form a single composition
in relief. The lions are six in number,
and are represented as pursuing and attacking one another. Each has
seized the hind-leg and the back of the
one which precedes it; they thus form an endless chain around the object,
and are a most effective form of
decoration. Unlike the majority of mace-heads, that of Mesilim is not
perforated from top to bottom. The hole
for receiving the handle of the weapon, though deep, is not continued to
the top of the stone, which is
carved in low relief with a representation of a lion-headed eagle with wings
outspread and claws extended. Looked
at from above, this fantastic animal appears as an isolated figure, but it
is not to be separated from the lions
running round the side of the mace-head. In fact, we may see in the whole
composition a development of the
symbol which formed the arms of the city of Lagash, and was the
peculiar emblem of the city-god Ningirsu. In the latter, the lion-headed eagle grasps two lions by the back, and
in Mesilim's sacred mace we have
the same motive of a lion-headed eagle above lions. It was, indeed, a
peculiarly appropriate votive offering
for an
overlord of Lagash to make. As suzerain of Lagash, Mesilim had repaired
the temple
of Ningirsu,
the city-god; the colossal mace-head, wrought with a design taken from
the emblem of the city and its
god, was thus a fitting object for his inscription. By depositing it in Ningirsu's
temple, he not only sought to
secure the favour of the local god by his piety, but he left in his city a
permanent record of his own dominion.
Of
Lugal-shag-engur we know as yet nothing beyond
his name, and the fact that he was patesi of Lagash at the time of
Mesilim, but the latter ruler has left a
more enduring mark upon history. For a later patesi of Lagash, Entemena,
when giving a historical summary
of the relations which existed between his own city and the
neighbouring city of Umma, begins his
account with the period of Mesilim, and furnishes additional testimony to the
part which this early king
of Kish played in the local affairs of southern
The
form in which the record of the treaty is cast is of peculiar interest, for
it forcibly illustrates the theocratic feeling of these early peoples. It is
in accordance with
their point of view that the actual patesis of Lagash and Umma are not
named, and the dispute is regarded
as having been adjusted by the gods. The deity
who presided over the conference, and at whose invitation the treaty is
stated to have been made, was Enlil,
"the king of the lands". Owing to his unique position among the local
gods of Babylonia, his divine authority
was recognized by the lesser city-gods. Thus it was at his command that
Ningirsu, the god of Lagash, and
the city-god of Umma fixed the boundary. It is true that Mesilim, the King
of Kish, is referred to by name,
but he only acted at the word of his own goddess Kadi, and his duties were
confined to making a record of the
treaty which the gods themselves had drawn up. We could not have a more
striking instance of the manner
in which the early inhabitants of Babylonia regarded the city-gods as
the actual kings and rulers of their
cities. The human kings and patesis were nothing
THE TREATY OF MESALIM (c. 2500 B.C.)
By the immutable word of Enlil, king of the
lands, father of the gods, Ningirsu and Shara set a boundary to their lands. Mesilim,
King of Kish, at the command of his deity Kadi, set up a stele [a boundary
marker] in the plantation of that field. Ush, ruler of Umma,
formed a plan to seize it. That stele he broke in pieces, into the plain of
Lagash he advanced. Ningirsu, the hero of Enlil, by his just command, made war upon Umma. At the command of Enlil,
his great net ensnared them. He erected their burial mound on the plain in that
place.
Eannatum, ruler
of Lagash, brother of the father of Entemena [who put
up this inscription] . . . for Enakalli, ruler of Umma, set the border to the land. He carried a canal from
the great river to Guedin. He opened the field of Ningirsu on its border for 210 spans to the power of Umma. He ordered the royal field not to be seized. At the
canal he inscribed a stele. He returned the stele of Mesilim to its place. He did not encroach on the plain of Mesilim. At the boundary-line of Ningirsu,
as a protecting structure, he built the sanctuary of Enlil,
the sanctuary of Ninkhursag . . . By harvesting, the
men of Umma had eaten one storehouse-full of the
grain of Nina [goddess of Oracles], the grain of Ningirsu;
he caused them to bear a penalty. They brought 144,000 gur,
a great storehouse full, [as repayment]. The taking of this grain was not to be
repeated in the future.
Urlumma, ruler
of Umma, drained the boundary canal of Ningirsu, the boundary canal of Nina; those steles he threw
into the fire, he broke [them] in pieces; he destroyed the sanctuaries, the
dwellings of the gods, the protecting shrines, the buildings that had been
made. He was as puffed up as the mountains; he crossed over the boundary canal
of Ningirsu. Enannatum, ruler
of Lagash, went into battle in the field of Ugigga,
the irrigated field of Ningirsu. Entemena,
the beloved son of Enannatum, completely overthrew
him. Urlumma fled. In the midst of Umma he killed him. He left behind 60 soldiers of his force
[dead] on the bank of the canal
"Meadow-recognized-as-holy-from-the-great-dagger." He left these
men--their bones on the plain. He heaped up mounds for them in 5 places. Then
Ili, Priest of Ininni of Esh in Girsu, he established as a vassal ruler over Umma.
Ili took the ruler of Umma into his hand. He
drained the boundary canal of Ningirsu, a great
protecting structure of Ningirsu, unto the bank of
the Tigris above from the banks of Girsu. He took the
grain of Lagash, a storehouse of 3600 gur. Entemena, ruler of Lagash declared hostilities on Ili, whom
for a vassal he had set up. Ili, ruler of Umma,
wickedly flooded the dyked and irrigated field; he
commanded that the boundary canal of Ningirsu; the
boundary canal of Nina, be ruined. . . Enlil and Ninkhursag did not permit [this to happen]. Entemena, ruler of Lagash, whose name was spoken by Ningirsu, restored their canal to its place according to
the righteous word of Enlil, according to the
righteous word of Nina, their canal which he had constructed from the river
Tigris to the great river, the protecting structure, its foundation he had made
of stone . . .
(From George A. Barton, "Inscription of Entemena #7" The Royal Inscriptions of Sumer and Akkad (New Haven, Conn. 1929) pp.
61, 63 & 65. The original post is at the Ancient History Sourcebook.)
THE CONE OF ENTEMENA (2450-2375 BC)
"For the goddess Inanna, for the god Lord Emesh. Entemena, the
ruler of Lagash. The temple Emesh, beloved of
the people, he built it. He ordered these clay nails for it. Entemena, the man who built the Emesh,
his personal god is god Shulutul. Entemena, the ruler of Lagash and Lugal-kinishe-dudu,
the ruler of Uruk, made a brotherhood treaty."
We could not have a more striking instance of the manner in which the early inhabitants of Babylonia regarded the city-gods as the actual kings and rulers of their cities. The human kings and patesis were nothing their more than ministers, or agents, appointed to carry out their will. Thus, when one city made war upon another, it was because their gods were at feud; the territory of the city was the property of the city-god, and, when a treaty of delimitation was proposed, it was naturally the gods themselves who arranged it and drew up its provisions.
We are
enabled to fix approximately the period of Mesilim by this reference
to him upon the cone of Entemena,
but we have no such means of determining the
date of another early ruler of the city of Ivish, whose name has been
recovered during the American excavations
on the site of Nippur. Three fragments of a vase of dark brown
sandstone have been found there, engraved
with an inscription of Utug, an early patesi of Kish. They are said to have
been found in the strata beneath
the chambers of the great temple of Enlil on the south-east side of the
ziggurat, or temple-tower. It
would be rash to form any theory as to the date of the vase solely from the
position in which the fragments are said to have been discovered, but the extremely archaic forms of
the characters of the inscription suggest that it dates from the earliest
period of
Babylonian history. Moreover, Utug is termed upon it patesi, not king,
of Kish, suggesting that he ruled
at a time when Kish had not the power and influence it enjoyed under
Mesilim. The hegemony in
Sumer and Akkad constantly passed from one city to another, so that it is
possible that Utug should be set
after Mesilim, when the power of Kish had temporarily declined. But as the
characters of Utug's inscription
are far more archaic than those of Mesilim, we may provisionally set
him in the period before Kish attained
the rank of a kingdom in place of its patesiate. But how long an interval
separated Utug from Mesilim there
is no means of telling.
On the
assumption that Utug ruled in this early period,
we may see in the fragments of his vase from Nippur, evidence of the
struggles by which the city of Kish
attained the position of supremacy it enjoyed under
Mesilim. For Utug's vase was not carried to Nippur as spoil from Kish,
but was deposited by Utug himself
in the temple of Enlil, in commemoration of a victory he had achieved
over the land of Khamazi. We
here learn the name of one of the enemies with whom Kish had to fight in
the early stages of its existence
as an independent city-state, and we may conjecture
that many more such battles had to be fought
and won before its influence was felt beyond the boundaries of Akkad by the
Sumerian cities in the south.
The fact that after his victory Utug deposited the vase at Nippur as a
thank-offering proves that in his
time the shrine of Enlil was already regarded as the central sanctuary of
Babylonia. Zamama, the god of Kish,
had achieved the victory over Khamazi, but Enlil, as the supreme lord of the
world, was entitled to some recognition
and gratitude, and also probably to a share of the spoil. From one line
of the inscription upon Utug's
vase we may perhaps infer that his father's name was Bazuzu, but, as no
title follows the name, he is not to be
reckoned as a patesi of Kish. We may thus conclude that Utug did not
succeed his father upon the throne.
Whether he was a usurper or succeeded some other relative, and whether
he followed up his military successes
by founding at Kish a powerful dynasty to which Mesilim may have
belonged, are among the questions
which may perhaps be answered as the result of future excavation in
Northern Babylonia.
It is
probable that the early supremacy which Kish enjoyed during the reign of
Mesilim continued for some time
after his death. At any rate, the names of two other early rulers of that
city are known, and, as they both
bear the title of king, and not patesi, we may conclude that they lived
during a period of the city's prosperity
or expansion. The name of one of these kings,
Urzage, occurs upon a broken vase of white calcite
stalagmite, which
was found at Nippur, approximately in the same
place as the vase of the patesi
Utug. The
inscription upon the vase records the fact that
it was
dedicated by Urzage to Enlil, "king of the
lands", and his consort Ninlil,
"the lady of heaven and earth". The end of the
text is wanting, but
we may conjecture that, like his earlier
predecessor Utug, the king dedicated
the vase in the temple of Enlil, at Nippur, in
gratitude for some victory over
his enemies. We may thus see in the dedication
of the vase further evidence of
the continued prosperity of Kish, though it is
clear that it only maintained
its position among the other great cities of the
land by force of arms. The
name of the other early king of Kish,
Lugaltarsi, is known to us from a short
inscription upon a small tablet of lapis-lazuli
preserved in the British
Museum. The text records the building of the
wall of the enclosure, or outer court, of
a temple dedicated to Anu and the goddess Ninni,
but, as its provenance is
unknown, it is impossible to base any argument
upon it with reference to the
extent of the influence exerted by Kish during
the reign of Lugaltarsi. Such are the few facts which have come down to
us with regard to the earliest
period of the supremacy of Kish. But the
fortunes of the city were destined to
undergo a complete change, in consequence of the
increase in the power of
Lagash which took place during the reign of
Eannatum. Before we describe the
transfer of power from the north to Sumer, it
will be necessary to retrace our
steps to the point where we left the history of
that city, during the time that
Mesilim was ruling in the north.
The names of the successors of Lugal-shag-engur, Mesilim's contemporary, upon the throne of Lagash have not yet been recovered, and we do not know how long an interval separated his reign from that of Ur-Nina, the early king of Lagash, from whose time so many inscriptions and archaeological remains have been recovered at Tello. It is possible that within this period we should set another ruler of Lagash, named Badu, to whom reference appears to be made by Eannatum upon the famous Stele of the Vultures. The passage occurs in the small fragment that has been preserved of the first column of the text engraved upon the stele, the following line containing the title "King of Lagash". The context of the passage is not preserved, but it is possible that the signs which precede the title are to be taken as a proper name, and in that case they would give the name of an early ruler of the city. In favour of this view we may note that in the text upon an archaic clay tablet found below the level of Ur-Nina's building at Tello the name Badu occurs, and, although it is not there employed as that of a king or patesi, the passage may be taken as evidence of theuse of Badu as a proper name in this early age. Assuming that Badu represents a royal name, it may be inferred from internal evidence furnished by Eannatum's inscription that he lived and reigned at some period before Ur-Nina. The introductory columns of Eannatum's text appear to give a brief historical summary concerning the relations which were maintained between Lagash and the neighbouring city of Urama in the period anterior to Eannatum's own reign. Now the second column of the text describes the attitude of Umma to Lagash in the reign of Akurgal, Ur-Nina's son and successor; it is thus a natural inference that Badu was a still earlier ruler who reigned at any rate before Ur-Nina. Whether he reigned before Lugal-shag-engur also, there are no data for deciding. It will be noted that Eannatum calls him "king" of Lagash, not "patesi", but the use of these titles by Eannatum, as applied to his predecessors, is not consistent, and, that he should describe Badu as "king", is no proof that Badu himself claimed that title. But he may have done so, and we may provisionally place him in the interval between the patesi Lugal-shag-engur and Ur-Nina, who in his numerous texts that have been recovered always claims the title of "king" in place of "patesi", a fact that suggests an increase in the power and importance of Lagash. To the same period we may probably assign Enkhegal, another early king of Lagash, whose name has been recovered on an archaic tablet of limestone.
It has been suggested that the title lugal, "king", did not acquire its later significance until the age of Sargon (Shar-Gani-sharri), but that it was used by earlier rulers as the equivalent of the Semitic belu, "lord". But, in view of the fact that Mesilim bore the title, it would seem that in his time it already conveyed a claim to greater authority than that inherent in the word patesi. The latter title was of a purely religious origin; when borne by a ruler it designated him as the representative of his city-god, but the title "king" was of a more secular character, and connoted a wider dominion. But it must be admitted that some inconsistencies in the use of the titles by members of Ur-Nina's dynasty seem to suggest that the distinction between them was not quite so marked as in the later periods. It is
possible that Ur-Nina himself, though not a great soldier, did something to
secure, or at least to maintain, the independence of his city. In any case, we
know that he was the founder of his dynasty, for to neither his father Gunidu,
nor to his grandfather Gursar, does he ascribe any titular rank. We may assume
that he belonged to a powerful Sumerian family in Lagash, but, whether he
obtained the throne by inheritance from some collateral branch, or secured it
as the result of a revolt within the city, is not recorded. It is strange that
in none of his numerous inscriptions does he lay claim to any conquest or
achievement in the field. Most of his texts, it is true, are of a dedicatory
character, but, to judge from those of other Sumerian rulers, this fact should
not have prevented him from referring to them, had he any such successes to
chronicle. The nearest approach to a record of a military nature is that he
rebuilt the wall of Lagash. It is therefore clear that, though he may not have
embarked on an aggressive policy, he did not neglect the defence of his own
city. But that appears to have been the extent of his ambition : so long as
the fortifications of the city were intact, and the armed men at her disposal
sufficient for the defence of Lagash herself and her outlying territory, he did
not seek to add to his own renown or to the city's wealth by foreign conquest.
The silence of Entemena
But,
while Ur-Nina's policy appears to have been mainly of a domestic
character, he did not fail to maintain relations with other cities in the
sphere of religious observance.
That he should have continued in active communication
with Nippur, as the religious centre of the
whole of Babylonia, is what we might infer from the practice of the period,
and we may probably trace to
this fact his dedication to Enlil of one of the canals which was cut during his
reign. A more striking instance
of the deference paid by Ur-Nina to the god of another city may be seen
in his relations to Enki, the
Sumerian prototype of the god Ea. When Ur- Nina planned the rebuilding
of the temple E-ninnu, he appears
to have taken precautions to ensure the success of his scheme by making a
direct appeal to Enki, the city-god
of Eridu. On a diorite plaque that has been found at Tello he records the delivery of his prayer to
Enki, that in his character of Chief Diviner he should use his pure reed, the wand
of his divination, to render the work good and should pronounce a favourable
oracle. The temple of Enki in the city of Eridu, near the shore of the Persian
Gulf, was one of the earliest and most sacred of Sumerian shrines, and we may
perhaps picture Ur-Nina as journeying thither from Lagash, in order to carry
his petition in person into the presence of its mysterious god.
Of the
deities of Lagash to whose service Ur-Nina appears especially to have devoted
himself, the goddess Nina, whose name he bore within his own, was one of the
most favoured. For one of the chief claims to distinction that he puts forward
is that he built her temple at Lagash; and although, unlike the later great
builder Gudea, he gives in his inscriptions few details of his work, we may
conclude that he lavished his resources upon it. He also boasts that he made a
statue of Nina, which he no doubt set up within her temple, and one of his
canals he dedicated to her. Her daughter Ninmar was not neglected, for he
records that he built her temple also, and he erected a temple for Gatumdug,
Nina's intercessor, and fashioned a statue of her. Another group of Ur-Nina's buildings
was connected with the worship of Ningirsu, the city-god of Lagash, whose
claims a ruler, so devoted to the interests of his own city as Ur-Nina, would
naturally not have ignored.
A glance at his texts will show that Ur-Nina more than once describes himself as the builder of "the House of Girsu", a title by which he refers to E-ninnu, the great temple dedicated to Ningirsu, since it stood in that quarter of the city which was named Girsu and was by far its most important building. He also built E-pa, a sanctuary closely connected with E-ninnu and the worship of Ningirsu. This temple was added to at a later date by Gudea, who installed therein his patron god, Ningishzida, and set the nuptial gifts of Bau, Ningirsu's consort, within its shrine; it is possible that Ur-Nina's onyx bowl, which was dedicated to Bau, and the fragments of other bowls found with it, mere deposited by Ur-Nina in the same temple. Of other deities in Ningirsu's entourage, whom Ur-Nina singled out for special veneration, may be mentioned Dunshagga, Ningirsu's son, and Uri-zi, the god whose duty it was to look after Ningirsu's karim. Among lesser temples, or portions of temples, which were built or restored by him was the Tirash, where on the day of the New Moon's appearance it was the custom to hold a festival in honour of Ningirsu; while another act of piety which Ur-Nina records was the making of a statue of Lugal-uru, the god from whose festival one of the Sumerian months took its name. In this connection, mention may also be made of the god Dun ..., whom Ur-Nina describes as the "God-king", since he stood in a peculiar relation to Ur-Nina and his family. He became the patron deity of the dynasty which Ur-Nina founded, and, down to the reign of Enannatum II, was the personal protector of the reigning king or patesi of Lagash. For
the construction of his temples Ur-Nina states that he fetched wood from
the mountains, but unlike Gudea
in a later age, he is not recorded to have brought in his craftsmen
from abroad. In addition to the
building of temples, Ur-Nina's other main activity appears to have
centred in the cutting of canals;
among these was the canal named Asukhur, on the
banks of which his grandson Eannatum won a
battle. That the changes he introduced into the canalization of the country
were entirely successful may be
inferred from the numerous storehouses and magazines, which he records
he built in connection with
the various temples, and by his statement that when he added to the temple
of Ningirsu he stored up
large quantities of grain within the temple-granaries.
We are
not dependent solely on what we can gather from the inscriptions themselves for
a knowledge of Ur-Nina. For he has left us sculptured representations, not only
of himself, but also of his sons and principal officers, from which we may form
a very clear picture of the primitive conditions of life obtaining in Sumer at
the time of this early ruler. The sculptures take the form of limestone
plaques, roughly carved in low relief with figures of Ur-Nina surrounded by his
family and his court. The plaques are oblong in shape, with the corners slightly rounded, and in the
centre of each is bored a circular hole. Though they are obviously of a votive
character, the exact object for which they are intended is not clear at first
sight. It has been, and indeed is still, conjectured that the plaques were
fixed vertically to the walls of shrines, but this explanation has been discredited by the discovery of the plaque, or
rather block, of Dudu, the priest of Ningirsu during the reign of Entemena.
From the shape of the latter, the reverse of which is not flat but pyramidal,
and also from the inscription upon it, we gather that
WARS OF THE CITY-STATES;EANNATUM AND THE STELE OF THE VULTURES
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
