|
A HISTORY
OF
SUMER AND AKKAD
an account of the early races of Babylonia from prehistoric times to the foundation of the babylonian monarchy
BY
LEONARD W. KING
AMAZON READERS
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTORY: THE LANDS OF SUMER AND AKKAD
Early Sumerian Pictographic Tablet |
 |
Trend
of recent archaeological research — The study of origins — The
Neolithic period in the Aegean area, in the region of the Mediterranean,
and in the Nile Valley — Scarcity of Neolithic remains in Babylonia due
largely to character of the country — Problems raised by excavations in
Persia and Russian Turkestan — Comparison of the earliest cultural
remains in Egypt and Babylonia — The earliest known inhabitants of South
Babylonian sites — The "Sumerian Controversy" and a shifting of the
problem at issue — Early relations of Sumerians and Semites — The lands
of Sumer and Akkad — Natural boundaries — Influence of geological
structure — Effect of river deposits — Euphrates and the Persian Gulf —
Comparison of Tigris and Euphrates — The Shatt en-Nil and the Shatt
el-Kar — The early course of Euphrates and a tendency of the river to
break away westward — Changes in the swamps — Distribution of population
and the position of early cities — Rise and fall of the rivers and the
regulation of the water — Boundary between Sumer and Akkad — Early names for Babylonia — "The Land" and its significance
CHAPTER II
THE SITES OF EARLY CITIES AND THE RACIAL CHARACTER OF THEIR INHABITANTS
|
 |
Characteristics of early Babylonian
sites — The French excavations at Tello — The names Shirpurla and
Lagash — Results of De Sarzec's work — German excavations at Surghul and
El-Hibba — The so-called "fire-necropoles" — Jokha and its ancient name
— Other mounds in the region of the Shatt el-Kar — Hammam — Systematic
excavations at Fara (Shuruppak) — Sumerian dwelling-houses and circular
buildings of unknown use — Sarcophagus-graves and mat-burials —
Differences in burial customs — Diggings at Abu Hatab (Kisurra) —
Pot-burials — Partial examination of Bismaya (Adab) Hetime — Jidr — The
fate of cities which escaped the Western Semites — American excavations
at Nippur — British work at Warka (Erech), Senkera (Larsa), Tell Sifr,
Tell Medina, Mukayyar (Ur), Abu Shahrain (Eridu), and Tell Lahm — Our
knowledge of North Babylonian sites — Excavations at Abu Habba (Sippar),
and recent work at Babylon and Borsippa — The sites of Agade, Cutha,
Kish and Opis — The French excavations at Susa — Sources of our
information on the racial problem — Sumerian and Semitic types —
Contrasts inconsistencies — Evidence of the later and the earlier
monuments — Evidence from the racial character of Sumerian gods —
Professor Meyer's theory and the linguistic evidence — Present condition
of the problem — The original home and racial affinity of the Sumerians
— Path of the Semitic conquest — Origin of the Western Semites — The
eastern limits of Semitic influence
CHAPTER III
THE AGE AND PRINCIPAL ACHIEVEMENTS OP SUMERIAN CIVILIZATION
Sumerians record pictograph representing words on clay tablets |
 |
Effect
of recent research on older systems of chronology — Reduction of very
early dates and articulation of historical periods — Danger of the
reaction going too far and the necessity for noting where evidence gives
place to conjecture — Chronology of the remoter ages and our sources of
information — Classification of material — Bases of the later native
lists and the chronological system of Berossus — Palaeography and
systematic excavation — Relation of the early chronology to that of the
later periods — Effect of recent archaeological and epigraphic evidence —
The process of reckoning from below and the foundations on which we may
build — Points upon which there is still a difference of opinion — Date
for the foundation of the Babylonian Monarchy — Approximate character
of all earlier dates and the need to think in periods — Probable dates
for the Dynasties of Ur and Isin — Dates for the earlier epochs and for
the first traces of Sumerian civilization — Pre-Babylonian invention of
cuneiform writing — The origins of Sumerian culture to be traced to an
age when it was not Sumerian — Relative interest attaching to many
Sumerian achievements — Noteworthy character of the Sumerian arts of
sculpture and engraving — The respective contributions of Sumerian and
Semite — Methods of composition in Sumerian sculpture and attempts at an
unconventional treatment — Perfection of detail in the best Sumerian
work — Casting in metal and the question of copper or bronze — Solid and
hollow castings and copper plating — Terracotta figurines — The arts of
inlaying and engraving — The more fantastic side of Sumerian art —
Growth of a naturalistic treatment in Sumerian design — Period of
decadence
CHAPTER IV
THE EARLIEST SETTLEMENTS IN SUMER; THE DAWN OF HISTORY AND THE RISE OF LAGASH
 |
Origin of the great cities — Local cult-centres in the prehistoric period — The earliest Sumerian settlements — Development of the
city-god and evolution of a pantheon — Lunar and solar cults — Gradual
growth of a city illustrated by the early history of Nippur and its
shrine — Buildings of the earliest Sumerian period at Tello —
Store-houses and washing-places of a primitive agricultural community —
The inhabitants of the country as portrayed in archaic sculpture — Earliest written records and the prehistoric system of land tenure — The first rulers of Shuruppak and their office — Kings
and patesis of early city-states — The dawn of history in Lagash and the
suzerainty of Kish — Rivalry of Lagash and Umma and the Treaty of
Mesilim — The role of the city-god and the theocratic feeling of the
time — Early struggles of Kish for supremacy — Connotation of royal
titles in the early Sumerian period — Ur-Nina the founder of a dynasty
in Lagash — His reign and policy — His sons and household — The position
of Sumerian women in social and official life — The status of Lagash
under Akurgal
CHAPTER V
WARS OF THE CITY-STATES; EANNATUM AND THE STELE OF THE VULTURES
 |
Condition
of Sumer on the accession of Eannatum — Outbreak of war between Umma
and Lagash — Raid of Ningirsu's territory and Eannatum's vision — The
defeat of Ush, patesi of Umma, and the terms of peace imposed on his
successor — The frontier-ditch and the stelae of delimitation —
Ratification of the treaty at the frontier shrines — Oath-formulae upon
the Stele of the Vultures — Original form of the Stele and the fragments
that have been recovered — Reconstitution of the scenes upon it —
Ningirsu and his net — Eannatum in battle and on the march — Weapons of
the Sumerians and their method of fighting in close phalanx —
Shield-bearers and lancebearers — Subsidiary use of the battle-axe — The
royal arms and bodyguard — The burial of the dead after battle — Order
of Eannatum's conquests — Relations of Kish and Umma — The defeat of
Kish, Opis and Mari, and Eannatum's suzerainty in the north — Date of
his southern conquests and evidence of his authority in Sumer — His
relations with Elam, and the other groups of his campaigns — Position of
Lagash under Eannatum — His system of irrigation — Estimate of his
reign
CHAPTER VI
THE CLOSE OF UR-NINA'S DYNASTY, THE REFORMS OF URUKAGINA, AND THE FALL OF LAGASH
A statue of Ebih II, priest of Ishtar, the goddess of war. From around 2400 BC. |
 |
Cause
of break in the direct succession at Lagash — Umma and Lagash in the
reign of Eannatum I — Urlumma's successful raid — His defeat by Entemena
and the annexation of his city — Entemena's cone and its summary of
historical events — Extent of Entemena's dominion — Sources for history of the period between Enannatum II
and Urukagina — The relative order of Enetarzi, Enlitarzi and Lugalanda —
Period of unrest in Lagash — Secular authority of the chief priests and
weakening of the patesiate — Struggles for the succession — The
sealings of Lugal-anda and his wife — Break in traditions inaugurated by
Urukagina — Causes of an increase in officialdom and oppression — The
privileges of the city-god usurped by the patesi and his palace —
Tax-gatherers and inspectors "down to the sea" — Misappropriation of
sacred lands and temple-property, and corruption of the priesthood — The
reforms of Urukagina — Abolition of unnecessary posts and stamping out
of abuses — Revision of burial fees — Penalties for theft and protection
for the poorer classes — Abolition of diviner's fees and regulation of
divorce — The laws of Urukagina and the Sumerian origin of Hammurabi's
Code — Urukagina's relations to other cities — Effect of his reforms on
the stability of the state—The fall of Lagash
CHAPTER VII
EARLY RULERS OF SUMER AND KINGS OF KISH
Great Lyre sound box, c. 2600-2500 BCE
|
 |
Close
of an epoch in Sumerian history — Increase in the power of Umma and
transference of the capital to Erech — Extent of Lugal-zaggisi's empire,
and his expedition to the Mediterranean coast — Period of
Lugal-kigub-nidudu and Lugal-kisalsi — The dual kingdom of Erech and Ur —
Enshagkushanna of Sumer and his struggle with Kish Confederation of
Kish and Opis — Enbi-Ishtar of Kish and a temporary check to Semitic
expansion southwards — The later kingdom of Kish — Date of Urumush and
extent of his empire — Economic conditions in Akkad as revealed by the
Obelisk of Manishtusu — Period of Manishtusu's reign and his military
expeditions — His statues from Susa—Elam and the earlier Semites — A
period of transition — New light on the foundations of the Akkadian
Empire
CHAPTER VIII
THE EMPIRE OF AKKAD AND ITS RELATION TO KISH
Sargon
of Agade and his significance — Early recognition of his place in
history — The later traditions of Sargon and the contemporary records of
Shar-Gani-sharri's reign — Discovery at Susa of a monument of
"Sharru-Gi, the King" — Probability that he was Manishtusu's father and
the founder of the kingdom of Kish — Who, then, was Sargon? —
Indications that only names and not facts have been confused in the
tradition — The debt of Akkad to Kish in art and politics — Expansion of
Semitic authority westward under Shar-Ganisharri — The alleged conquest
of Cyprus — Commercial intercourse at the period and the disappearance
of the city-state — Evidence of a policy of deportation — The conquest
of Naram-Sin and the "Kingdom of the Four Quarters" — His Stele of
Victory and his relations with Elam — Naram-Sin at the upper reaches of
the Tigris, and the history of the Pir Hussein Stele — Naram-Sin's
successors — Representations of Semitic battle-scenes — The Lagash Stele
of Victory, probably commemorating the original conquest of Kish by
Akkad — Independent Semitic principalities beyond the limits of Sumer
and Akkad — The reason of Akkadian pre-eminence and the deification of
Semitic kings
A cylinder-seal
impression of two Gods, one with a left hand in the shape of a
scorpion and the other plowing behind a dragon and a lion. The
impression was made by a seal found at Tell Asmar in Iraq. |
 |
CHAPTER IX
THE LATER RULERS OF LAGASH
The god Annunaki |
 |
Sumerian
reaction tempered by Semitic influence — Length of the intervening
period between the Sargonic era and that of Ur — Evidence from Lagash of
a sequence of rulers in that city who bridge the gap — Archaeological
and epigraphic data — Political condition of Sumer and the
semi-independent position enjoyed by Lagash — Ur-Bau representative of
the earlier patesis of this epoch — Increase in the authority of Lagash
under Gudea — His conquest of Anshan — His relations with Syria, Arabia, and the Persian Gulf — His influence of a commercial rather than of a political character — Development in the art of building which marked the
later Sumerian architectural ideas — The rebuilding of E-ninnu and the
elaborate character of Sumerian ritual — The art of Gudea's period — His
reign the golden age of Lagash — Gudea's posthumous deification and his
cult — The relations of his son, Ur-Ningirsu, to the Dynasty of Ur
CHAPTER X
THE DYNASTY OF UR AND THE KINGDOM OF SUMER AND AKKAD
The
part taken by Ur against Semitic domination in an earlier age, and her
subsequent history — Organization of her resources under Ur-Engur — His
claim to have founded the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad — The subjugation
of Akkad by Dungi and the Sumerian national revival — Contrast in
Dungi's treatment of Babylon and Eridu — Further evidence of Sumerian
reaction — The conquests of Dungi's earlier years and his acquisition of
regions formerly held by Akkad — His adoption of the bow as a national
weapon — His Elamite campaigns and the difficulty in retaining control
of conquered provinces — His change of title and assumption of divine
rank — Survival of Semitic influence in Elam under Sumerian domination —
Character of Dungi's Elamite administration — His reforms in the
official weight-standards and the system of time-reckoning —
Continuation of Dungi's policy by his successors — The cult of the
reigning monarch carried to extravagant lengths — Results of
administrative centralization when accompanied by a complete delegation
of authority by the king — Plurality of offices and provincial
misgovernment the principal causes of a decline in the power of Ur
CHAPTER XI
THE EARLIER RULERS OF ELAM, THE DYNASTY OF ISIN, AND THE RISE OF BABYLON
Standing male worshipper, 2750–2600 BC |
 |
Continuity
of the kingdom of Sumer and Akkad and the racial character of the kings
of Isin — The Elamite invasion which put an end to the Dynasty of Ur —
Native rulers of Elam represented by the dynasties of Khutran-tepti and
Ebarti — Evidence that a change in titles did not reflect a revolution
in the political condition of Elam — No period of Elamite control in
Babylonia followed the fall of Ur — Sources for the history of the
Dynasty of Isin — The family of Ishbi-Ura and the cause of a break in
the succession — Rise of an independent kingdom in Larsa and Ur, and the
possibility of a second Elamite invasion — The family of Ur-Ninib
followed by a period of unrest in Isin — Relation of the Dynasty of Isin to that of Babylon — The
suggested Amorite invasion in the time of Libit-Ishtar disproved — The
capture of Isin in Sin-muballit's reign an episode in the war of Babylon
with Larsa — The last kings of Isin and the foundation of the
Babylonian Monarchy — Position of Babylon in the later historical
periods, and the close of the independent political career of the
Sumerians as a race — The survival of their cultural influence.
CHAPTER XII
THE CULTURAL INFLUENCE OF SUMER IN EGYPT, ASIA AND THE WEST
 |
Relations
of Sumer and Akkad with other lands — Cultural influences, carried by
the great trade-routes, often independent of political contact — The
prehistoric relationship of Sumerian culture to that of Egypt — Alleged
traces of strong cultural influence — The hypothesis of a Semitic
invasion of Upper Egypt in the light of more recent excavations —
Character of the Neolithic and early dynastic cultures of Egypt, as
deduced from a study of the early graves and their contents — Changes
which may be traced to improvements in technical skill — Confirmation
from a study of the skulls — Native origin of the Egyptian system of
writing and absence of Babylonian influence— Misleading character of
other cultural comparisons — Problem of the bulbous mace-head and the
stone cylindrical seal — Prehistoric migrations of the cylinder —
Semitic elements in Egyptian civilization — Syria a link in the historic
period between the Euphrates and the Nile — Relations of Elam and Sumer
— Evidence of early Semitic influence in Elamite culture and proof of
its persistence — Elam prior to the Semitic conquest — The Proto-Elamite
script of independent development — Its disappearance paralleled by
that of the Hittite hieroglyphs — Character of the earlier strata of the
mounds at Susa and presence of Neolithic remains — The prehistoric
pottery of Susa and Mussian —Improbability of suggested connections
between the cultures of Elam and of predynastic Egypt — More convincing
parallels in Asia Minor and Russian Turkestan — Relation of the
prehistoric peoples of Elam to the Elamites of history — The Neolithic
settlement at Nineveh and the prehistoric cultures of Western Asia —
Importance of Syria in the spread of Babylonian culture westward — The
extent of early Babylonian influence in Cyprus, Crete, and the area of
Aegean civilization
PREFACE
THE
excavations carried out in Babylonia and Assyria during the last few
years have added immensely to our knowledge of the early history of
those countries, and have revolutionized many of the ideas current with
regard to the age and character of Babylonian civilization. In the
present volume, which deals with the history of Sumer and Akkad, an
attempt is made to present this new material in a connected form, and to
furnish the reader with the results obtained by recent discovery and
research, so far as they affect the earliest historical periods. An
account is here given of the dawn of civilization in Mesopotamia, and of
the early city-states which were formed from time to time in the lands
of Sumer and Akkad, the two great divisions into which Babylonia was at
that period divided. The primitive sculpture and other archaeological
remains, discovered upon early Babylonian sites, enable us to form a
fairly complete picture of the races which in those remote ages
inhabited the country. By their help it is possible to realize how the
primitive conditions of life were gradually modified, and how from rude
beginnings there was developed the comparatively advanced civilization,
which was inherited by the later Babylonians and Assyrians and exerted a
remarkable influence upon other races of the ancient world.
In
the course of this history points are noted at which early contact with
other lands took place, and it has been found possible in the historic
period to trace the paths by which Sumerian culture was carried beyond
the limits of Babylonia. Even in prehistoric times it is probable that
the great trade routes of the later epoch were already open to traffic,
and cultural connections may well have taken place at a time when
political contact cannot be historically proved. This fact must be borne
in mind in any treatment of the early relations of Babylonia with
Egypt. As a result of recent excavation and research it has been found
necessary to modify the view that Egyptian culture in its earlier stages
was strongly influenced by that of Babylonia. But certain parallels are
too striking to be the result of coincidence, and, although the
southern Sumerian sites have yielded traces of no prehistoric culture as
early as that of the Neolithic and predynastic Egyptians, yet the
Egyptian evidence suggests that some contact may have taken place
between the prehistoric peoples of North Africa and Western Asia.
Far
closer were the ties which connected Sumer with Elam, the great centre
of civilization which lay upon her eastern border, and recent
excavations in Persia have disclosed the extent to which each
civilization was of independent development. It was only after the
Semitic conquest that Sumerian culture had a marked effect on that of
Elam, and Semitic influence persisted in the country even under Sumerian
domination. It was also through the Semitic inhabitants of northern
Babylonia that cultural elements from both Sumer and Elam passed beyond
the Taurus, and, after being assimilated by the Hittites, reached the
western and south-western coasts of Asia Minor. An attempt has therefore
been made to estimate, in the light of recent discoveries, the manner
in which Babylonian culture affected the early civilizations of Egypt,
Asia, and the West. Whether through direct or indirect channels, the
cultural influence of Sumer and Akkad was felt in varying degrees
throughout an area extending from Elam to the Aegean.
In
view of the after effects of this early civilization, it is of
importance to determine the region of the world from which the Sumerian
race reached the Euphrates. Until recently it was only possible to form a
theory on the subject from evidence furnished by the Sumerians
themselves. But explorations in Turkestan, the results of which have now
been fully published, enable us to conclude with some confidence that
the original home of the Sumerian race is to be sought beyond the
mountains to the east of the Babylonian plain. The excavations conducted
at Anau near Askhabad by the second Pumpelly Expedition have revealed
traces of prehistoric cultures in that region, which present some
striking parallels to other early cultures west of the Iranian plateau.
Moreover, the physiographical evidence collected by the first Pumpelly
Expedition affords an adequate explanation of the racial unrest in
Central Asia, which probably gave rise to the Sumerian immigration and
to other subsequent migrations from the East.
It
has long been suspected that a marked change in natural conditions must
have taken place during historic times throughout considerable areas in
Central Asia. The present comparatively arid condition of Mongolia, for
example, is in striking contrast to what it must have been in the era
preceding the Mongolian invasion of Western Asia in the thirteenth
century, and travellers who have followed the route of Alexander's army,
on its return from India through Afghanistan and Persia, have noted the
difference in the character of the country at the present day. Evidence
of a similar change in natural conditions has now been collected in
Russian Turkestan, and the process is also illustrated as a result of
the explorations conducted by Dr. Stein, on behalf of the Indian
Government, on the borders of the Taklamakan Desert and in the oases of
Khotan. It is clear that all these districts, at different periods, were
far better watered and more densely populated than they are today, and
that changes in climatic conditions have reacted on the character of the
country in such a way as to cause racial migrations. Moreover, there
are indications that the general trend to aridity has not been uniform,
and that cycles of greater aridity have been followed by periods when
the country was capable of supporting a considerable population. These
recent observations have an important bearing on the Sumerian problem,
and they have therefore been treated in some detail in Appendix I.
The
physical effects of such climatic changes would naturally be more
marked in mid-continental regions than in districts nearer the coast,
and the immigration of Semitic nomads into Syria and Northern Babylonia
may possibly have been caused by similar periods of aridity in Central
Arabia. However this may be, it is certain that the early Semites
reached the Euphrates by way of the Syrian coast, and founded their
first Babylonian settlements in Akkad. It is still undecided whether
they or the Sumerians were in earliest occupation of Babylonia. The
racial character of the Sumerian gods can best be explained on the
supposition that the earliest cult-centres in the country were Semitic;
but the absence of Semitic idiom from the earliest Sumerian inscriptions
is equally valid evidence against the theory. The point will probably
not be settled until excavations have been undertaken at such North
Babylonian sites as El-Ohemir and Tell Ibrahim.
That
the Sumerians played the more important part in originating and
moulding Babylonian culture is certain. In government, law, literature
and art the Semites merely borrowed from their Sumerian teachers, and,
although in some respects they improved upon their models, in each case
the original impulse came from the Sumerian race. Hammurabi's Code of
Laws, for example, which had so marked an influence on the Mosaic
legislation, is now proved to have been of Sumerian origin; and recent
research has shown that the later religious and mythological literature
of Babylonia and Assyria, by which that of the Hebrews was also so
strongly affected, was largely derived from Sumerian sources.
The
early history of Sumer and Akkad is dominated by the racial conflict
between Semites and Sumerians, in the course of which the latter were
gradually worsted. The foundation of the Babylonian monarchy marks the
close of the political career of the Sumerians as a race, although, as
we have seen, their cultural achievements long survived them in the
later civilizations of Western Asia. The designs upon the cover of this
volume may be taken as symbolizing the dual character of the early
population of the country. The panel on the face of the cover represents
two Semitic heroes, or mythological beings, watering the humped oxen or
buffaloes of the Babylonian plain, and is taken from the seal of
Ibni-Sharru, a scribe in the service of the early Akkadian king
Shar-Gani-sharri. The panel on the back of the binding is from the Stele
of the Vultures and portrays the army of Eannatum trampling on the dead
bodies of its foes. The shaven faces of the Sumerian warriors are in
striking contrast to the heavily bearded Semitic type upon the seal.
A
word should, perhaps, be said on two further subjects—the early
chronology and the rendering of Sumerian proper names. The general
effect of recent research has been to reduce the very early dates, which
were formerly in vogue. But there is a distinct danger of the reaction
going too far, and it is necessary to mark clearly the points at which
evidence gives place to conjecture. It must be admitted that all dates
anterior to the foundation of the Babylonian monarchy are necessarily
approximate, and while we are without definite points of contact between
the earlier and later chronology of Babylonia, it is advisable, as far
as possible, to think in periods. In the Chronological Table of early
kings and rulers, which is printed as Appendix II, a scheme of
chronology has been attempted; and the grounds upon which it is based
are summarized in the third chapter, in which the age of the Sumerian
civilization is discussed.
The
transliteration of many of the Sumerian proper names is also
provisional. This is largely due to the polyphonous character of the
Sumerian signs; but there is also no doubt that the Sumerians themselves
frequently employed an ideographic system of expression. The ancient
name of the city, the site of which is marked by the mounds of Tello, is
an instance in point. The name is written in Sumerian as Shirpurla,
with the addition of the determinative for place, and it was formerly
assumed that the name was pronounced as Shirpurla by the Sumerians. But
there is little doubt that, though written in that way, it was actually
pronounced as Lagash, even in the Sumerian period. Similarly the name of
its near neighbour and ancient rival, now marked by the mounds of
Jokha, was until recently rendered as it is written, Gishkhu or Gishukh;
but we now know from a bilingual list that the name was actually
pronounced as Umma.
The
reader will readily understand that in the case of less famous cities,
whose names have not yet been found in the later syllabaries and
billingual texts, the phonetic readings may eventually have to be
discarded. When the renderings adopted are definitely provisional, a
note has been added to that effect.
I
take this opportunity of thanking Dr. E. A. Wallis Budge for permission
to publish photographs of objects illustrating the early history of
Sumer and Akkad, which are preserved in the British Museum. My thanks
are also due to Monsieur Ernest Leroux, of Paris, for kindly allowing me
to make use of illustrations from works published by him, which have a
bearing on the excavations at Tello and the development of Sumerian art;
to Mr. Raphael Pumpelly and the Carnegie Institution of Washington, for
permission to reproduce illustrations from the official records of the
second Pumpelly Expedition; and to the editor of Nature for kindly
allowing me to have cliches made from blocks originally prepared for an
article on "Transcaspian Archaeology", which I contributed to that
journal. With my colleague, Mr. H. R. Hall, I have discussed more than
one of the problems connected with the early relations of Egypt and
Babylonia; and Monsieur F. Thureau-Dangin, Conservateur-adjoint of the
Museums of the Louvre, has readily furnished me with information
concerning doubtful readings upon historical monuments, both in the
Louvre itself, and in the Imperial Ottoman Museum during his recent
visit to Constantinople. I should add that the plans and drawings in the
volume are the work of Mr. P. C. Carr, who has spared no pains in his
attempt to reproduce with accuracy the character of the originals.
L. W. KING
|