Assyria And Babylonia
Assyria And Babylonia
ASSYRIA AND BABYLONIA
I. Assyria
1. Natural features and Civilization.Strictly speaking, Assyria was a small district bounded on the N. and E. by the mountains of Armenia and Kurdistan, on the W. by the Tigris, on the S. by the Upper Zab. The W. bank of the Tigris was early included, and the limits of the kingdom gradually extended till the Empire included all Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine, and parts of Asia Minor and Egypt. The term Assyria, therefore, was widely different in meaning at different periods. The earliest capital was Asshur, on the W. of the Tigris, between the mouths of the Upper and Lower Zab. The above-named district, a natural stronghold, was the nucleus of the country. For the most part hilly, with well-watered valleys and a wide plain along the Tigris, it was fertile and populous. The cities Calah at the junction of the Upper Zab, Nineveh on the Chser, Dur-Sargon to the N.E., Imgur-Bel S.E., Tarbis to the N.W., and Arbla between the rivers Zab, were the most noted in Assyria itself.
The climate was temperate. The slopes of the hills were well wooded with oak, plane, and pine; the plains and valleys produced figs, olives, and vines. Wheat, barley, and millet were cultivated. In the days of the Empire the orchards were stocked with trees, among which have been recognized date palms, orange, lemon, pomegranate, apricot, mulberry, and other fruits. A great variety of vegetables were grown in the gardens, including beans, peas, cucumbers, onions, lentils. The hills furnished plenty of excellent building stone, the soft alabaster specially lent itself to the decoration of halls with sculptures in low relief, while fine marbles, hard limestone, conglomerate and basalt, were worked into stone vessels, pillars, altars, etc. Iron, lead, and copper were obtainable in the mountains near. The lion and wild ox, the boar, deer, gazelle, goat, and hare were hunted. The wild ass, mountain sheep, bear, fox, jackal, and many other less easily recognized animals are named. The eagle, bustard, crane, stork, wild goose, various ducks, partridge, plover, the dove, raven, swallow, are named; besides many other birds. Fish were plentiful. The Assyrians had domesticated oxen, asses, sheep, goats, and dogs. Camels and horses were introduced from abroad.
The Assyrians belonged to the North Semitic group, being closely akin to the Aramans, Phnicians, and Hebrews. Like the other Mesopotamian States, Assyria early came under the predominating influence of Babylonia. According to Gen 10:11, Nimrod went out from the land of Shinar into Assyria and built Nineveh, etc. That Babylonian colonies settled in Assyria is probable, but it is not clear that they found a non-Semitic population there. The Assyrians of historic times were more robust, warlike, fierce (Isa 33:19), than the mild, industrial Babylonians. This may have been due to the influence of climate and incessant warfare; but it may indicate a different race. The culture and religion of Assyria were essentially Babylonian, save for the predominance of the national god Ashur. The king was a despot at home, general of the army abroad, and he rarely missed an annual expedition to exact tribute or plunder some State. The whole organization of the State was essentially military. The literature was borrowed from Babylonia, and to the library of the last great king, Ashurbanipal, we owe most of the Babylonian classics. The Assyrians were historians more than the Babylonians, and they invented a chronology which is the basis of all dating for Western Asia. They were a predatory race, and amassed the spoils of all Mesopotamia in their treasure-houses, but they at least learned to value what they had stolen. The enormous influx of manufactured articles from abroad and the military demands prevented a genuinely native industrial development, but the Assyrians made splendid use of foreign talent. In later times, the land became peopled by captives, while the drain upon the Assyrian army to conquer, garrison, colonize, and hold down the vast Empire probably robbed the country of resisting power.
2. History.The excavations conducted at Nineveh and Calah by Layard, 1845 to 1851; by Botta at Khorsabad, 18431845; continued by Rassam, G. Smith, and others up to the present time; the edition of the inscriptions by Rawlinson, Norris, and Smith, and the decipherment of them by Rawlinson, Hincks, and Oppert, have rendered available for the history of Assyria a mass of material as yet only partially digested. Every year fresh evidence is discovered by explorers in the East, and the wide-spread influence of Assyria may be illustrated by the discovery of a stele of Sargon in Cyprus, a stele of Esarhaddon at Zinjerli on the borders of Cilicia, a letter from Ashur-uballit, king of Assyria, to Amenophis IV., king of Egypt, at Tell el-Amarna in Egypt, of statues of Assyrian kings at Nahrel-Kelb near Beyrout. Besides this primary source of history, chiefly contemporaneous with the events it records, we have scattered incidental notices in the historical and prophetical books of the OT giving an important external view, and some records in the Greek and Latin classics, mostly too late and uncritical to be of direct value. Owing to the intimate connexion of Assyria and Babylonia, a great deal may be treated as common matter, but it will conduce to clearness to separate their history. Some of the common sources for history will be noticed here.
(a) Chronology
() Year-names.The Babylonians gave each year a name. Thus the names of the first four years of the reign of Hammurabi are: (1) the year in which Hammurabi became king; (2) the year in which Hammurabi established the heart of the land in righteousness; (3) the year in which the throne of Nannar was made; (4) the year in which the wall of Malg was destroyed. These dates, or year-names, were decided upon and notice sent round to the principal districts, early each year. Thus we know that the date, or year-name, to be used for the eighth year of Samsu-iluna was sent as far as the Lebanon, where the tablet giving the order was found. Until the new year-name was known, the year was dated the year after the last known date. Thus the fourth year of Hammurabi would be called the year after that in which the throne of Nannar was made. The scribes kept a record of these dates, and a long list of year-names, in two recensions, has been published, which, if perfect, would have given the year-names from Sumu-abi to the tenth year of Ammi-zaduga. It was natural that the same ideogram MU should denote year and name. When, therefore, this list counts 43 MU to the reign of Hammurabi, we do not know that he reigned 43 years, but only that he used 43 year-names in his reign. We know that the same year was sometimes called by two different names. When, therefore, the Kings List gives him a reign of 55 years, we may explain the discrepancy by supposing that the list of year-names gives only the number of separate names. As a year-name often mentions a campaign, it seems most unlikely that it could have been given at the beginning of the year, still more when it records such an event as the fall of a city. The list of year-names records some event, usually domestic, religious, or military, for each year, and consequently has been called a chronicle. This system of dating occurs as early as Sargon I. Its ambiguity for future generations is obvious. The kings of Larsa developed an era, the years being called the first, second, etc. (up to the 30th), after the capture of Isin. In the third dynasty the method of dating by the year of the kings reign was introduced. If a king died in the 20th year of his reign, he is said to have reigned 20 years. The remainder of the year was the accession year of his successor, and his first year was that beginning on the first of Nisan after his accession. Thus over a long series of years, the sum of the reigns is accurately the length in years, except for the margin at the beginning and end: it is exact to a year.
() Eponym Canon.The Assyrians devised a modification of the year-name which avoided all difficulty. They named each year after a particular official, who could be selected at the beginning of the year, which was called his limmu or eponymy. The particular official for each year was originally selected by lot (pru), but later a fixed order was followed, the king, the Tartan, the chief of the levy, the chief scribe, etc., then the governors of the chief cities. As the Empire extended, the governors of such distant places as Carchemish, Razappa, Kummuh, or even Samaria, became eponyms. Later still the order seems to be quite arbitrary, and may have been a royal choice. Lists of these officials, in their actual order of succession, known as the Eponym Canons, were drawn up, are fairly complete from b.c. 911 to b.c. 668, and can be restored to b.c. 648. This method of dating is at least as early as Arik-dn-ilu, and was in use in Cappadocia, possibly much earlier. A very large number of names of Eponyms are known, which are not in the Canons, but as yet they can rarely be dated.
() Chronological statements.This system, however, provided an accurate means of dating, and warrants great reliance on the statements of the kings as to the dates of events long before their times. Provided that they had access to earlier Eponym Canons than we possess, there is no reason why they should not be exact. Later kings were not disinclined to give such chronological statements. Thus Shalmaneser I. states that Erishum built the temple of Ashur, in Asshur, which Shamshi-Adad rebuilt 159 years later, but which was destroyed 580 years later by a fire and built afresh by him. The king does not state in which year of either of the reigns these events took place. Esarhaddon also states that the temple was built by Erishum, restored by Shamshi-Adad, son of Bel-kabi, and again by Shalmaneser I. 434 years later, and again by himself. The former statement may be preferred, as Shalmaneser I. was much nearer to the events, and it is easier to reconcile with other statements. Sennacheribs Bavian inscription states that he recovered the gods of Ekallati, which had been carried away by Marduk-nadin-ahe, king of Akkad, in the days of Tiglath-pileser I., 418 years before, thus dating both Marduk-nadin-ahe and Tiglath-pileser I. at about b.c. 1107. Tiglath-pileser I. tells us that he rebuilt the temple of Ashur and Adad which had been pulled down by his great-grandfather Ashur-dan I., 60 years before, and had then stood 641 years since its foundation by Shamshi-Adad, son of Ishme-Dagan. This puts Shamshi-Adad about b.c. 1820 and Ashur-dan about 1170. Sennacherib also states that a seal captured from Babylon by Tukulti-Ninib I. had been carried away to Babylon again and was brought back by him 600 years later. This puts Tukulti-Ninib I. about b.c. 1289. Ashurbanipal states that on his capture of Susa he brought back the image of Nana, which had been carried off by Kudur-nanhundi, 1635 years before. This puts an invasion of Babylon at b.c. 2275. A boundary stone dated in the 4th year of Bl-ndin-apli states that from Gulkishar, probably the sixth king of the second Babylonian Dynasty, to Nebuchadrezzar I. there were 696 years. This puts Gulkishar about b.c. 1820. Nabonidus states that he restored a temple in Sippara, which had not been restored since Shagarakti-shuriash, 800 years before. This puts that king about b.c. 1350. Further, that Naram-Sin, son of Sargon I., was 3200 years before him, which dates Naram-Sin about b.c. 3750. Further, that Hammurabi lived 700 years before Burna-buriash. This dates Hammurabi about b.c. 2100, or b.c. 2150, according as we understand Burna-buriash I. or II. to be intended. It is evident that all such dates are vague. The numbers may be only approximate, 600 for 560 or 640, say. Further, we do not know from which year of the writers reign to reckon, nor to which year of the king named. This may add a further margin of uncertainty.
() The Kings List, Ptolemys Canon, Eponym List.The Babylonian Kings List, if complete, would have given the names of the kings of Babylonia from the First Dynasty down to the last native ruler, Nabonidus, with the lengths of their reigns. It does furnish these particulars for long periods. The famous Canon of Ptolemy begins with Nabonassar, b.c. 747, and gives the names of the kings, including the Assyrians Poros (Tiglath-pileser III.), Sargon, and Esarhaddon, with the dates of their reigns, down to Nabonidus, then the Achmenids to Alexander the Great, the Ptolemys and Romans, so connecting with well-known dates. The Eponym Canon lists record the eclipse of b.c. 763, and their dates are thus fixed. So far as they overlap, the last three sources agree exactly. We may then trust the Eponym Canons to b.c. 911 and the Kings List wherever preserved.
() Genealogies, Date Documents.The kings usually mention their father and grandfather by name; often an earlier ancestor, or predecessor, naming his father, and we are thus enabled to trace back a dynasty from father to son over long periods. Unfortunately we are rarely told by them how long a king reigned, but where we have documents dated by the year of his reign, we can say he reigned at least so many years.
In both Assyrian and Babylonian history there are still wide gaps, but exploration is continually filling them up. The German explorations at Asshur added quite 20 new names to the list of Assyrian rulers. It is dangerous to argue that, because we do not know all the rulers in a certain period, it ought to be reduced in length. It is as yet impossible to reconcile all the data, because we are not sure of the kings referred to. We already know five or six of the same name, and it may well be that we mistake the reference.
() Synchronous History.The so-called Synchronous History of Assyria and Babylonia dealt with the wars and rectification of boundaries between the two countries from b.c. 1400 to b.c. 1150 and b.c. 900 to b.c. 800; and the Babylonian Chronicle gave the names and lengths of reign of the kings of Assyria, Babylonia, and Elam from b.c. 744 to b.c. 668. These establish a number of synchronisms, besides making considerable contributions to the history.
The bulk of the history is derived from the inscriptions of the kings themselves. Here there is an often remarked difference between Assyrian and Babylonian usage. The former are usually very full concerning the wars of conquest, the latter almost entirely concerned with temple buildings or domestic affairs, such as palaces, walls, canals, etc. Many Assyrian kings arrange their campaigns in chronological order, forming what are called Annals. Others are content to sum up their conquests in a list of lands subdued. We rarely have anything like Annals from Babylonia.
The value to be attached to these inscriptions is very various. They are contemporary, and for geography Invaluable. A king would hardly boast of conquering a country which did not exist. The historical value is more open to question. A conquest meant little more than a raid successful in exacting tribute. The Assyrians, however, gradually learnt to consolidate their conquests. They planted colonies of Assyrian people; endowing them with conquered lands. They transported the people of a conquered State to some other part of the Empire, allotting them lands and houses, vineyards and gardens, even cattle, and so endeavoured to destroy national spirit and produce a blended population of one language and one civilization. The weakness of the plan lay in the heavy taxation which prevented loyal attachment. The population of the Empire had no objection to the substitution of one master for another. The demands on the subject States for men and supplies for the incessant wars weakened all without attaching any. The population of Assyria proper was insufficient to officer and garrison so large an empire, and every change of monarch was the signal for rebellion in all outlying parts. A new dynasty usually had to reconquer most of the Empire. Civil war occurred several times, and always led to great weakness, finally rendering the Empire an easy prey to the invader.
The following table of monarchs is compiled from the above-mentioned materials. Where the relationship of two kings is known, it is indicated by S for son, B for brother, of the preceding king. When two kings are known to be contemporaries = is placed between their names. Probable dates of accession are given with a query, known dates without. Where a figure with + is placed after a name it indicates monumentally attested minimum length of reign, thus 25 + means at least 25 years. The lengths of reigns in the Year List or Chronicle for the First Dynasty are given in brackets.
B.C.I. First Dynasty of Babylon.Length of Reign.Patesis of Asshur.B.C.
2396?Sumu-abi15(14)
2382?Sumu-l-el35(36)
2347?Zabum, S14
2333?Apil-Sin, S18
2325?Sin-muballit, S30(20)
2285?Hammurabi, S55(43)=Shamshi-Adad i.
2230?Samsu-ilna, S35(38)Ushpia
2195?Abshu, S25Kika
2170?Ammi-satana, S25Kate-Ashir
2145?Ammi-zadga, S21Shalim-abum, S
2124?Samsu-satna, S31Ilu-shma, S
II. Dynasty of Uru-azag.
Erishm, S
2093?Ilu-ma-ilu60Ikunum, S
2033?ltti-ili-ibi55Shar-kenkate-Ashir
1978?Damki-ilishu36Ishme-Dagan i.
1942?Ish-ki-bal15Ashur-nirari i. S
1927?Shushshi, B27Bl-kabi
1900?Gulkishar55Shamshi-Adad ii. S
1845?Peshgal-daramash, S50Igur-kapkapi
1795?A-dara-kalama, S28Shamshi-Adad iii. S
1767?Akur-ul-auna26Ishme-Dagan ii.
1741?Melam-kurkurra7Shamshi-Adad iv. S1820?
1734?Ea-gmil9
III. Kassite Dynasty.Kings of Assyria.
1725?Gandash16Adasi
1709?Agum I. S22Bl-ibni, S
1687?Agu-iashi22Bl-kapkapi
1665?Adshi, S8Sullu
1657?AdumetashAshur-rabi, S
TazzigurumashAshur-nirari ii. S
Agum ii. SAshur-rm-nishshu, S
Kurigalzu i. S
Melishihu i. SPuzur-Ashur i.
Marduk-apliddina i. SAshur-nirari iii.
Kara-indash i.=Ashur-bl-nishshu, S
Burna-buriash i. S=Puzur-Ashur ii.
Adad.
Ashur-ndin-ahi
Kara-indash ii.Erba-Adad i. S
Kadashman-harbe i.Ashur-uballit i. S
Nazi-bugashAshur-ndin-ahe
Kurigalzu ii.=Ashur-uballit ii. S
Burna-buriash ii. S25+Bl-nirari, S
Kurigalzu iii. S26=Arik-dn-ilu, S
Nazi-maruttash, S24+=Adad-nirari i. S
Kadashman-Turgu16+
Kadashman-Bl6+
Kudur-Bl9+
1355?Shagarakti-shuriash, S23+Shulmanu-ashared i. S
Bitiliashu, S8=Tukulti-Ninib i. S1310?
Bl-ndin-shum11/2Ashur-nzir-apli i. S
Kadashman-harbe ii.11/2Ashur-nirari iv.
Adad-shum-iddina6Nab-dan
Adad-shum-usur30=Ninib-tukulti-Ashur1289?
Ashur-shum-lishir
Bl-kudur-usur
Melishihu ii.15=Erba-Adad ii.
Marduk-apliddina ii.13Ninib-apil-Esharra, S
Zamama-shum-iddina1Ashur-dan i. S
Bl-ndin-ahi3
IV. Dynasty of Isin.
Marduk-ah-erba17
(Unknown name)6Mutakkil-Nusku, S
Nab-kudur-usur i.=Ashur-rsh-ishi, S
Bl-ndin-apli4+
Marduk-ndin-ah10+=Tukulti-apil-Esharra i. S1107?
Marduk-shpik-zri=Ashur-bl-kala, S
Adad-apliddina22Shamshi-Adad v. B
Marduk.11/2Ashur-dn ii. B
Marduk-zr.13Adad-nirari ii. S
Nab-shum.9Ashur-nzir-apli ii.
V. Dynasty of the Sealand.
Simbar-shihu18
Ea-mukn-zri5mo.
Kashshu-ndin-ahi3
VI. Dynasty of Bazi.
Eulmash-shkin-shum17Ashur-kirbi
Ninib-kudur-usur3
Shilanum-shuqamuna3mo.
VII. Dynasty of Elam.
An Elamite6
VIII. Dynasty of Babylon.
Nab-mukn-apli36Adad-nirari iii.
Unknown8mo.Tukulti-apil-Esharra ii. S
Ashur-dan iii. S914?
Shamash-mudammikAdad-nirari iv. S911
Nab-shum-ishkun i.=Tukulti-Ninib ii. S889
879?Nab-apliddina31+=Ashur-nzir-apli iii. S884
Marduk-shum-iddina, SShulmnu-ashared ii. S858
851?Marduk-balatsu-ikbi=Shamshi-Adad vi. S823
Bau-ah-iddinaAdad-nirari v. S810
Marduk.Shulmnu-ashared iii. S781
Nab-shum-ishkun ii.8+Ashur-dan iv.771
747Nab-nsirAdad-nirari vi. S763
733Nab-ndin-zr2Ashur-nirari v. S753
731Nab-shum-kn42days=Tukulti-apil-Esharra iii.745
IX. Dynasty of Shash.
731Ukn-zr
729Pln Dynasty of Tinu
727Ululai=Shulmnu-ashared iv.727
721Marduk-apliddina iii.12Sharru-knu ii722=
710Sharru-knu ii.
704Sin-ahe-erba=Sin-ahe-erba, S705
Marduk-zkir-shum1mo.
Marduk-apliddina iii. (returned)9mo.
702Bl-ibni2
700Ashur-ndin-shum6
693Nergal-ushzib1
692Mushzib-Marduk3
689Sin-ahe-erba7
681Ashur-ahiddin=Ashur-ahiddin, S681
667Shamash-shum-ukn=Ashur-bni-apli, S668
648KandalnuAshur-etil-ilni. S, 4+626
X. Chaldn Dynasty.Sin-shar-ishkun, B, 7+?
625Nab-aplu-usur21=Fall of Nineveh606
604Nab-kudur-usur ii. S43
561Amel-Marduk, S2
559Nergal-shar-usur3
556Labashi-Marduk
555Nab-nid16
539Oct. 10, Fall of Babylon
(b) Early traditions.We may dismiss as mythical the Assyrian claim that Nineveh was founded directly after the Creation, but it points to a tradition of immemorial antiquity. Sargon claimed to have been preceded on his throne by 350 rulers of Assyria; but even if he counted ancient Babylonian overlords of Assyria, we have no means of checking his figures. Sennacherib professed to trace his lineage back to Gilgamesh, Eabni, and Humbaba, the heroes of the Babylonian National Epic, through such ancient rulers as Egiba, Laiti-Ashur, Ashur-gamilia, Shamash-sulnlishu, etc., whose names are not otherwise known. The reference made by Gudea to his having built a temple for Nana (= Ishtar) in Nineveh may be meant for the Babylonian city of the same name, and an inscription of Dungi found in Nineveh might have been carried there by Assyrian conquerors.
(c) Earliest mention.Hammurabi, however, in one of his letters refers to troops in Assyria, and in the prologue to his celebrated code of laws states that he returned to Asshur its gracious protecting deity and made glorious the name of Ishtar in her temple at Nineveh. As these benefactions are placed after the benefits conferred on the Babylonian cities, we may conclude that Asshur and Nineveh were subject to him, and that the deity referred to had been carried off by invaders, perhaps the Elamites, or Kassites. A contemporary letter mentions a defaulting debtor as having gone to Assyria. These are the earliest references to the country.
(d) Earliest rulers.The earliest rulers of Assyria styled themselves patesi of Asshur. The title was that borne by the city rulers of Babylonia. Its Assyrian equivalent was ishshakku, and it often interchanges with shang, priest. It was still borne by the kings of Assyria, but while it designated them then as chief priest of the nation, we may conclude that when used alone it implied that its bearer was subject to some king. Hence it has usually been supposed that the patesi of Asshur was subject to Babylonia. In the fourth year of Hammurabi one Shamshi-Adad is named in a way that suggests his being the patesi of Asshur, subject to Hammurabi. We know the names of many of these rulers. Thus Ushpia was the founder of the temple of Ashur in the city of Asshur, and may be the earliest of all. Kika, who may be the same as Kiki-Bl otherwise known, founded the city wall of Asshur, and may be as early, if not earlier. The title descended from father to son for five generations, of whom we put Erishum as early as b.c. 2000. Then we know some pairs, father and son, of whom the last Ishme-Dagan II. and Shamshi-Adad IV. are about b.c. 1820. The order in which these groups are arranged is at present purely conjectural, and we know nothing of the intervals between them. Shamshi-Adad II., son of Bl-kabi, should be some sixty years before Shamshi-Adad IV.
(e) Early kings.We do not know the exact date at which Assyria achieved her independence of Babylon, but it may well have synchronized with the Kassite conquest of Babylonia, or have contributed to it. A possible reference to the war of independence is contained in a tablet which names a great conflict between the king of Babylon and the prince of Assyria, to whom the title king is not conceded, which ended in the spoils of Babylon being carried to Assyria; but we are given no names to date events. Esarhaddon traced his descent from Adasi, father of Bl-ibni, who founded the kingdom of Assyria. If we credit this, Adasi or Bl-ibni was the first king. Adad-nirari III. states that Bl-kapkapi was an early king who lived before Sullu. It is doubtful whether the group of three, Ashur-rabi, Ashur-nirari II., and Ashur-rm-nishshu, the last of whom restored the city wall of Asshur, should not be put before the kings. As Ashur-bl-nishshu restored the wall of the Newtown of Asshur, which a Puzur-Ashur had founded, we must put a Puzur-Ashur I. before him. The interval of time we do not know, but a city wall surely lasted years before the reign of Ashur-bl-nishshus father, Ashur-nirari III.
(f) Relations with Egypt and Babylonia.About b.c. 1500 an Assyrian ruler sent gifts to Thothmes III., in his 24th and 30th years; but we are not told which king. The synchronous history now comes to our aid. Ashurbl-nishshu made a treaty with Kara-indash I. as to the boundaries of the two countries: a few years later Puzur-Ashur II. made a fresh treaty with Burna-buriash I. Ashur-uballit names Erba-Adad I. his father and Ashurndin-ahi his grandfather, in the inscription on the bricks of a well he made in Asshur. Adad-nirari I. names Puzur-Ashur, Ashur-bl-nishshu, Erba-Adad and Adad , in this order, as builders at the wall of Newtown. But the Ashur-uballit who wrote to Amenophis IV. in the Tell el-Amarna tablets says that his father Ashur-ndin-ahe was in friendly relationship with Amenophis III., and he was followed by his son Bl-nirari, whose son was Arik-dn-ilu and grandson Adad-nirari I., who names this Adad. He must therefore follow Ashur-uballit I.
(g) Extension to the West.Ashur-uballit II. gave his daughter Muballitat-Shera to Burna-buriash I. to wife. Her son Kadashman-harbe I. succeeded to the throne of Babylon, but the Kassites rebelled against him, put him to death and set up a Kassite, Nazi-bugash. Ashur-uballit invaded Babylonia, deposed the pretender, and set Kurigalzu II., another son of Burna-buriash, on the throne. With Asher-uballit also begins Assyrian history properthe expansion to the W., which was so fateful for Palestine. In the time of the Tell el-Amarna tablets Egypt was the overlord of Palestine, but already Mitanni, the Hittites, and further to the east Assyria and Babylonia, were treating with Egypt on equal terms. Tushratta, king of Mitanni, offered to send Ishtar of Nineveh to Amenophis III. This has been taken to mean that Mitanni then ruled over Nineveh; it may mean only that Ishtar of Nineveh was worshipped in Mitanni. But Ashur-uballit wrested Melitia from Mitanni, and conquered the Shubari to the N.W. of Assyria. Hence he probably ruled Nineveh also. Bl-nirari was attacked by Kurigalzu III. at Sugagu on the Zalzallat, but defeated him and made a fresh boundary settlement. Arik-dn-ilu (often read Pudi-ilu) conquered N., E., and W., penetrating as far as Halah on the Habor, subduing Turuku, Nigimtu, Gutium, the Aramans, Ahlami, and the Bedouin Sti. Adad-nirari I. was, early in his reign, defeated by Kurigalzu III., and lost the southern conquests of his predecessors, but later conquered Gutium, the Lullumi and Shubari, turned the tables by defeating Nazi-maruttash, and rectified his boundary to the S. On the W. he extended his conquests over Haran to the Euphrates. Shalmaneser I. (Shulmanu-ashared) crossed the upper waters of the Tigris, placed Assyrian colonies among the tribes to the N., subdued the Aramans of Upper Mesopotamia, took Melitia, the capital of Hani, defeated the Hittites, Ahlami, Musri, and Sti, captured Haran and ravaged up to Carchemish. He made Calah his capital, and restored the temple of Ishtar at Nineveh. He first bore the title shar kishshti, supposed to mark the conquest of Haran.
(h) Capture of Babylon.Tukulti-Ninib I. conquered Gutium, the Shubari, 40 kings of Nairi, the Ukumni, Elhnia, Sharnida, Mehri, Kurhi, Kummuh, the Push-sh, Mumme, Alzi, Madni, Nihni, Alaia, Arzi, Purukuzzi. His chief triumph, however, was over Babylon. He defeated and captured Bitiliashu, and took him prisoner to Assyria, ruling Babylonia seven years by his nominees. The first, Bl-ndin-shum, ruled eighteen months. Elam now appeared on the scene, invaded Babylonia, and a Kassite, Kadashman-harbe II., was set up. After eighteen months more, Tukulti-Ninib I. took Babylon, slew its people with the sword and set up Adad-shum-iddina, who ruled six years. Tukulti-Ninib deported the god Marduk to Assyria and carried off great spoil from Esaggila, his temple in Babylon. Among other things he carried off a seal of lapis lazuli, which had belonged to Shagarakti-shuriash, father of Bitiliashu, and engraved his own name and titles on it. It was afterwards carried back to Babylon, whence Sennacherib brought it once more 600 years later. We thus get a date b.c. 1289, which must fall either in Tukulti-Ninibs reign or in that of Ninib-tukulti-Ashurs, 16 (?) years later, when Marduk was carried back to Babylon. After Adad-shum-iddina had reigned six years, the Kassites and Babylonians set Adad-shum-usur on his fathers throne. Tukulti-Ninib had built a city called Kar-Tukulti-Ninib, close to Asshur, which he intended for a new capital, but that evidently estranged his own people, for his son Ashur-nazir-apli I. rebelled against him, besieged him in a house in his new city, and finally killed him. Of the reign of the parricide we know nothing. Adad-shum-usur corresponded with two kings of Assyria, Ashur-nirari IV. and Nab-dn, who appear to be reigning both at the same time. Perhaps they were sons of Tukulti-Ninib I., or it may be another Adad-shum-usur who was their contemporary. They are usually placed here, but we know nothing further about them. It was Ninib-tukulti-Ashur who carried back Marduk, and perhaps the seal above named, to Babylon. Possibly he took refuge from Ashur-shum-lishir. There is much doubt about this period, but Adad-shum-usur lived to defeat and kill Bl-kudur-usur. Erba-Adad II. is known only as father of Ninib-apil-Esharra, whom Tiglath-pileser I. calls a powerful king that truly shepherded the hosts of Assyria. He was besieged by Adad-shum-usur in Asshur. Ashur-dn I. defeated Zamama-shum-iddina and captured several Babylonian cities, carrying off much spoil to Assyria. He had a long reign. We know little of Mutakkil-Nusku. Ashur-rsh-ishi began to revive the military glories of Assyria, conquering the Ahlami, Gutium and Lullumi. He then invaded Babylonia, and Nebuchadrezzar I. attacked him in Assyria, but was defeated and lost his commander-in-chief.
(i) Tiglath-pileser I., etc.Tukulti-apil-Esharra (Tiglath-pileser) I. has left us very full accounts of a long reign and series of conquests; chiefly in Upper Mesopotamia along the base of the Caucasus, Armenia, and W. to the N.E. corner of the Mediterranean, in all 42 countries with their princes. The Bedouin Sti were driven back across the Euphrates. The Babylonian king Marduk-ndin-ahe invaded the S. of Assyria and carried off the gods of Ekallte, but, after two years fighting, Tiglath-pileser defeated him and captured the chief cities of North Babylonia, including Sippara and Babylon itself. He was no less distinguished by his restorations of home cities, and he acclimatized all sorts of useful trees and plants. Ashur-bl-kala, Shamshi-Adad V., and Ashur-dn II., sons of Tiglath-pileser, followed on the throne, but in what order is not known. Adad-nirari II. was son of Ashur-dn II., and Ashur-nzir-apli II. was son of Shamshi-Adad V.; but beyond these relationships nothing much is known of them. Shalmaneser II. tells us that he recaptured Pitru and Mitkunu on the far side of the Euphrates, which Tiglath-pileser had taken, but which were lost to Assyria in the reign of Ashur-kirbi. As Shalmanesers six predecessors cannot be separated, it is usual to put Ashur-kirbi here. Whether the king Ilu-hirbe who set up his image near the Amanus, also named by Shalmaneser, be the same or an earlier and more successful conqueror, is not yet clear. The interval between Tiglath-pileser I. and Ashur-nirari IV., with whom accurate chronology begins, also contained Adad-nirari III., Tukulti-apil-Esharra II., and Ashur-dn III., as known from genealogical notices, but as there is a gap of unknown extent at the commencement of the 8th Dynasty of Babylon, we cannot tell its length or how many things are still unknown to us. Adad-nirari IV. warred with Shamash-mudammk and Nab-shum-lshkun of Babylon; Tukulti-Ninib II. continued the subjugation of the mountaineers N. of Assyria, gradually winning back the Empire of Tiglath-pileser I.
With Ashur-nzir-apli III. began a fresh tide of Assyrian conquest, b.c. 885. He rebuilt Calah, and made it his capital. The small Araman State of Bt-Adni, between the Balih and Euphrates, held out against him, but he conquered the Mannai, Kirrr, and Zama between Lake Van and Lake Urmia. Carchemish, Unki (Amk), or Hattin on the Orontes were raided, and the army reached the Lebanon. Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, Arvad, etc., were fain to buy off the conqueror. Ashur-nzir-apli had invaded the Babylonian sphere of influence, and Nab-apli-iddina sent his brother Zabdnu to support his allies. Ashur-nzir-apll took Zabdnu and 3000 troops prisoners.
(j) Shalmaneser II., etc.The reign of Shalmaneser II., his son and successor, was one long campaign. He records 33 separate expeditions, and began to annex his conquests by placing governors over the conquered districts. The Armenian Empire now began to bar Assyrias progress north. Assyria now first appeared on Israels horizon as a threatening danger. Shalmanesers celebrated bronze doors at Balawat and the Black Obelisk give us pictures of scenes in his reign. They represent ambassadors from Girzn near Lake Urmia, from Jaha (Jehu) of Israel, from Musri, from Marduk-aplu-usur of Suhi, and from Karparunda of Hattin. This Musri is N.E. of Cilicia (1Ki 10:28), whence Solomon brought his horses. Shalmaneser invaded Ku in Cilicia, and Tabal (Tubal), where he annexed the silver, salt, and alabaster works. He reached Tarzi (Tarsus, the birthplace of St. Paul). To the N.E. he penetrated Parsa, the original Persia, in Babylonia, Nab-apli-iddina was deposed by his son, Marduk-shum-iddina, against whom arose his brother Marduk-bl-uste, who held the southern States of the Sealand, already peopled by the Chaldans. Shalmaneser invaded Babylonia, and, passing to the E., besieged Marduk-bl-uste in M-turnat, drove him from one stronghold to another, and finally killed him and all his partisans. In the role of a friend of Babylon, Shalmaneser visited the chief cities and sacrificed to the gods, captured most of the southern States, and laid them under tribute.
Shalmanesers campaign against Hamath on the Orontes took place in b.c. 854. The fall of Bt-Adni had roused all N. Syria to make a stand. At Karkar the Assyrian army had against them a truly wonderful combination.
Chariots.Horsemen.Foot.
Bir-idri of Damascus1200120020,000
Irhulini of Hamath70070010,000
Ahabbu of Siril200010,000
The Gu (Ku)500
Musri1,000
Irkanat1010,000
Matin-baal of Arvad200
Usanat200
Adunu-baal of Shiana3010,000
Basa of Ammon1,000
Gindibu the Arab1000 Camels.
The presence of Ahab in this battle in which Shalmaneser claims to have won the victory is most interesting. The battle was not productive of any settled results, as Shalmaneser had to fight the same foes in b.c. 849 and again in b.c. 846. In b.c. 842Samhalmaneser defeated Hazael, besieged him in Damascus, and carried off the spoils of Malaha, his residence. At this time he received tribute from Tyre, Sidon, and Jehu, of the house of Omri. Jehus tribute is interestingit includes silver, gold, a vessel of gold, a ladle of gold, golden drinking cups, golden beakers, tin, a sceptre, and bedolach.
Shalmanesers last years were clouded by the rebellion of his son Ashur-dnin-apli, who alienated more than half the Empire, and was not subdued by the successor to the throne, his brother Shamshi-Adad VI., till after eight years struggle. He may be considered actual king for those eight years. Shamshi-Adad had to fight the Babylonian kings Bau-ah-iddina and Marduk-balatsu-ikbi. He warred in Chalda and advanced into Media as far as Mt. Elvend to secure the Mannai and Parsa against the rising power of Armenia. Adad-nirari V. penetrated Media right up to the Caspian Sea. Armenia had pushed W. and secured Hani-rabbat and Daini, old conquests of Assyria. Adad-nirari V., however, fought several campaigns in the West. From the upper part of the Euphrates to the land of Hattl (N. Syria), Amurri (N. Palestine), Tyre, Sidon, the land of Omri (Israel), Udumu (Edom), and Palastu (Philistia), to the Mediterranean, he exacted tribute. He besieged Maria, king of Damascus, in his capital, captured it and carried off rich spoil. These expeditions may be placed in b.c. 804 and b.c. 797.
(k) Tiglath-pileser III.Armenia was steadily rising in power, and Assyria gradually lost all its northern conquests in Upper Mesopotamia; under Ashur-nirari V. the dynasty fell and a new line came to the throne in Tiglath-pileser III., b.c. 745. The world of small States had given way to a few strong kingdoms; the Chaldans were strongly forcing their way into lower Babylonia; in the north, Armenia was powerful and ready to threaten W. Syria; Egypt was awaking and anxious to interfere in Palestine. Assyria and Babylonia bade fair to fall a prey to stronger nations, when Tiglath-pileser III. roused the old energy. The Aramans were pouring into Babylonia, filled the Tigris basin from the lower Zab to the Uknu, and held some of the most celebrated cities of Akkad. Tiglath-pileser scourged them into subjection, and deported multitudes to the N.E. hills. The Medes were set in order, and then Tiglath-pileser turned to the west. The new kingdom of Arpad was strongly supported by Armenia, and Tiglath-pileser swept to the right into Kummuh, and took the Armenians in the rear. He crushed them, and for the time was left to deal with the West. Arpad took three years to reduce: then gradually all N. Syria came into Assyrian hands, b.c. 740. Hamath allied itself with Azrijahu of Iaudl (Azariah of Judah?) and Panammu of Samal. Tiglath-pileser broke up the coalition, devastated Hamath, and made the district an Assyrian province. The Southern States hastened to avoid invasion by paying tribute. Menahem of Israel, Zabibi of Arabia, Razunnu (Rezon) of Damascus, Hiram of Tyre are noteworthy; but Gebal, Carchemish, Hamath, Militia, Tabal, Kullni (Calno, Isa 10:9) also submitted, b.c. 738. In b.c. 734 Hanno of Gaza was defeated. In b.c. 733732 Damascus was besieged and taken, Israel was invaded, the whole of Naphtali taken, and Pekah had to pay heavy toll. In b.c. 731 he was murdered, and Tiglath-pileser acknowledged Hosea as successor. Ammon, Moab, Ashkelon. Edom, and Ahaz of Judah paid tribute. Sams, queen of the Arabians, was defeated, and the Sabans sent presents. This Tiglath-pileser is the Pul of 2Ki 15:19-20, who, after defeating the Chaldan Ukn-zr, who had got himself made king of Babylon, in b.c. 728 was crowned king of Babylon, as Pulu.
(l) Sargon.Shalmaneser IV. seems to have been son of Tiglath-pileser. He was king of Babylonia as Ulnlai, and succeeded to Tiglath-pilesers Empire. In b.c. 724 he began the siege of Samaria, which fell after three years. We have no Assyrian accounts of this reign. Sargon at once succeeded him, but we have no knowledge of his title to the throne. He never mentions his immediate ancestors, nor does Sennacherib, but the latter evidently wished to claim ancient royal descent, and Esarhaddon claimed descent from an early king. That Sargon is called ark, the later, in his own inscriptions may be meant to distinguish him from the great Sargon of Akkad, whose reign he so closely reproduced, or from some early Assyrian monarch, Shar-kn (Shar-kenkate-Ashir?). Samaria fell almost immediately (b.c. 722), and the flower of the nation, to the number of 27,290 persons, was deported and settled about Halab on the Habor, in the province of Gozan and in Media (2Ki 17:6), being replaced by Babylonians and Syrians. Merodach-baladan, a king of Bt Iakin, a Chaldan State in S. Babylonia, who had been tributary to Tiglath-pileser III., had made himself master of Babylon, and was supported there by Elam. Sargon met the Elamites in a battle which he claimed as a victory, but he had to leave Merodach-baladan alone as king in Babylon for twelve years. This failure roused the West under Iaubidi of Hamath, who secured Arpad, Simirra, Damascus, and Samaria as allies, supported by Hanno of Gaza and the N. Arabian Musri. Sargon in b.c. 720 set out to recover his power here. At Karkar, Iaubidi was defeated and captured, and the southern branch of the confederacy was crushed at Raphia. Hanno was carried to Assyria, 933 people deported, Shabi (Sibi, Sewe, So), the Tartan of Pirn of Musri, fled, the Arabians submitted and paid tribute. Azuri of Ashdod, who began to intrigue with Egypt, was deposed and replaced by his brother, Ahimitl. A rebellion in Ashdod led to a pretender being installed, but Sargon sent his Tartan to Ashdod (Isa 20:1), the pretender fled, and Ashdod and Gath were reduced to Assyrian provinces. Judah, Edom, and Moab staved off vengeance by heavy toll. Sargons heaviest task was the reduction of Armenia. Rusa I. was able to enlist all Upper Mesopotamia, including Mita of Mushki, and it took ten years to subdue the foe. Sargons efforts were clearly aided by the incursions of the Gimirri (Gomer) into N. Armenia. Having triumphed everywhere else, Sargon turned his veterans against Babylonia. The change of kings in Elam was a favourable opportunity for attacking Merodach-baladan, who was merely holding down the country by Chaldan troops. Sargon marched down the Tigris, seized the chief posts on the east, screened off the Elamites and threatened Merodach-baladans rear. He therefore abandoned Babylon and fell on Sargons rear, but, meeting no support, retreated S. to his old kingdom and fortified it strongly. Sargon entered Babylon, welcomed as a deliverer, and in b.c. 709 became king of Babylon. The army stormed Bt Iakin, but Merodach-baladan escaped over sea. Sargon then restored the ancient cities of Babylonia. His last years were crowned with the submission of far-off lands; seven kings of Cyprus sent presents, and Sargon set up a stele there in token of his supremacy. Dilmun, an island far down the Persian Gulf, did homage. Sargon founded a magnificent city, Dr Sargon, modern Khorsabad, to the N.E. of Nineveh. He died a violent death, but how or where is now uncertain.
(m) Sennacherib.Sennacherib soon had to put down rebellion in S.E. and N.W., but his Empire was very well held together, and his chief wars were to meet the intrigues of his neighbours, Elam and Egypt. Babylonia was split up into semi-independent States, peopled by Aramans, Chaldans, and kindred folk, all restless and ambitious. Merodach-baladan seized the throne of Babylon from Marduk-zkir-shum, Sargons viceroy, b.c. 704. The Aramans and Elam supported him. Sennacherib defeated him at Kish, b.c. 703, and drove him out of Babylon after nine months reign. Sennacherib entered Babylon, spoiled the palace, swept out the Chaldans from the land, and carried off 208,000 people as captives. On the throne of Babylon he set Bl-ibnl, of the Babylonian seed royal, but educated at his court. Merodach-baladan had succeeded in stirring the W., where Tyre had widely extended its power, and Hezekiah of Judah had grown wealthy and ambitious, to revolt. Ammon, Moab, Edom, the Arabians joined the confederacy, and Egypt encouraged. Padi, king of Ekron, a faithful vassal of Assyria, was overthrown by a rebellion in his city and sent in chains to Hezekiah. Sennacherib, early in b.c. 701, appeared on the Mediterranean coast, received the submission of the Phnician cities, isolated Tyre, and had tribute from Ammon, Moab, and Edom. Tyre he could not capture, so he made Itubai of Sidon overlord of Phnicia, and assailed Tyre with the allied fleet. Its king escaped to Cyprus, but the city heid out. Sennacherib meanwhile passed down the coast, reduced Ashkelon, but was met at Eitekeh by the Arabians and Egyptians. He gained an easy victory, and captured Eitekeh, Timnath, and Ekron. Then he concentrated his attention upon Judah, captured 46 fortified cities, deported 200,150 people, and shut up Hezekiah, like a bird in a cage, in Jerusalem. He assigned the Judan cities to the kings of Ashdod, Ekron, and Gaza, imposed fresh tribute, and received of Hezekiah thirty talents of gold, eight hundred talents of silver, precious stones, couches of ivory, thrones of ivory, precious woods, his daughters, his palace women, male and female singers, etc., an enormous spoil, which was carried to Nineveh. His siege of Lachish is depicted on his monuments. Before his campaign was over, Merodach-baladan had again appeared in Babylon. A difficulty has always been felt about the destruction of Sennacheribs army, because, if it took place after this campaign, he could hardly have been so successful in Babylonia. His inscriptions end with b.c. 689, but Esarhaddons references to the conquests of his father in Arabia, and a fragmentary reference to Azekah, suggest that he invested Jerusalem again, on a second campaign, and that the destruction occurred then. The Biblical narrative suggests that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, had already appeared on the scene. This would date the event after b.c. 691. Further, it seems to have occurred soon before his death in b.c. 681.
In Babylonia, Bl-ibni proved unfaithful and was recalled. Ashur-ndin-shum, Sennacheribs son, was installed as king, and reigned six years. Sennacherib devastated Bt Iakin and defeated Shuzub, a Chaldan king. He then employed Phnician shipbuilders and sailors to build ships at Til-barsip, on the Euphrates, and at Nineveh, on the Tigris. He floated his fleets down to the mouth of the rivers, shipped his army, and landed at the mouth of the Karn, where the Chaldans had taken refuge, b.c. 695. He sent the captives by ship to Assyria, and marched his army into S. Elam. The king of Elam, however, swooped down on Babylon and carried off Ashur-ndin-shum to Elam. Nergal-ushzib was raised to the throne, and, aided by Elamite troops, proceeded to capture the Assyrian garrisons and cut off the southern army. Sennacherib retreated to Erech and awaited Nergal-ushzib, who had occupied Nippur. He was defeated, captured, and taken to Assyria, b.c. 693. The Babylonians now made Shuzub, the Chaldan, king under the name of Mushzib-Marduk. A revolution in Elam tempted Sennacherib to invade that country, perhaps in hope of rescuing his son. He swept all before him, the Elamite king retreating to the mountains, but the severe winter forced Sennacherib to retreat, b.c. 692. Mushzib-Marduk and the Babylonians opened the treasury of Marduk to bribe the Elamites for support. A great army of Elamites, Aramans, Chaldans, and Babylonians barred Sennacheribs return at Haiie, on the E. of the Tigris, b.c. 691. Sennacherib claimed the victory, but had no power to do more, and left Mushzib-Marduk alone for the time. He came back to Babylonia in b.c. 690, and the new Elamite king being unable to assist, Babylon was taken, Mushzib-Marduk deposed and sent to Nineveh. Babylon was then sacked, fortifications and walls, temples and palaces razed to the ground, the inhabitants massacred, the canals turned over the ruins, b.c. 689. Sennacherib made Babylonia an Assyrian province, and was king himself till his death (b.c. 681). There is reason to think that he appointed Esarhaddon regent of Babylonia; at any rate it seems that this prince began to rebuild Babylon before his fathers death.
Sennacherib chose Nineveh, which had become a second-rate city, as his capital, and, by his magnificent buildings and great fortifications, made it a formidable rival to Calah, Asshur, and even Babylon before its destruction. His last few years are in obscurity, but he was murdered by his son or sons. See Adrammelech.
(n) Esarhaddon came to the throne b.c. 680, after a short struggle with the murderers of his father and their party. He had to repel an incursion of the Cimmerians in the beginning of his reign, and then conquered the Medes. In b.c. 677 Sidon was in revolt, but was taken and destroyed, a new city called Kar-Esarhaddon being built to replace it and colonized with captives from Elam and Babylonia, Ezr 4:2. In b.c. 676, Esarhaddon marched into Arabia and conquered the eight kings of Bazu and Hazu (Buz and Huz of Gen 22:21). In b.c. 674 he invaded Egypt, and again in 673. In b.c. 670 he made his great effort to conquer Egypt, drove back the Egyptian army from the frontier to Memphis, winning three severe battles. Memphis surrendered, Tirhakah fled to Thebes, and Egypt was made an Assyrian province. In b.c. 668 it revolted, and on the march to reduce it Esarhaddon died. He divided the Empire between his two sons, Ashurbanipal being king of Assyria and the Empire, while Shamash-shum-ukn was king of Babylon as a vassal of his brother.
(o) Ashurbanipal at once prosecuted his fathers reduction of Egypt to submission. Tirhakah had drawn the Assyrian governors, some of them native Egyptians, as Necho, into a coalition against Assyria. Some remained faithful, and the rising was suppressed; Tirhakah was driven back to Ethiopia, where he died b.c. 664. Tantamon invaded Egypt again, and Ashurbanipal in b.c. 662 again suppressed a rising, drove the Ethiopian out, and captured Thebes. Ashurbanipal besieged Baal, king of Tyre, and although unable to capture the city, obtained its submission and that of Arvad, Tabai, and Cilicia. Gyges, king of Lydia, exchanged embassies, and sent Ashurbanipal two captive Cimmerians, but he afterwards allied himself with Psammetichus, son of Necho, and assisted him to throw off the Assyrian yoke. The Minni had been restless, and Ashurbanipal next reduced them. Elam was a more formidable foe. Allying himself with the Aramans and Chaldans, Urtaku, king of Elam, invaded Babylonia, but he was defeated and his throne seized by Teumman. Ashurbanipal took advantage of the revolution to invade Elam and capture Susa; and after killing Teumman put Ummanigash and Tammaritu, two sons of Urtaku, on the thrones of two districts of Elam. He then took vengeance on the Aramans, E. of the Tigris. His brother, Shamash-shum-ukn, now began to plot for independence. He enlisted the Chaldans, Aramans, and Ummanigash of Elam, Arabia, Ethiopia, and Egypt. A simultaneous rising took place, and Ashurbanipal seemed likely to lose his Empire. He invaded Babylonia. In Elam, Tammaritu put to death Ummanigash and all his family, but was defeated by Indabigash, and had to flee to Assyria. Ashurbanipal defeated his opponents and laid siege to Babylon, Borsippa, Sippara, and Cutha, capturing one after the other. Shamash-shum-ukn burnt his palace over his head, and Babylon surrendered b.c. 648. The conquest of S. Babylonia and Chalda was followed by campaigns against Elam, culminating in the capture of Susa and its destruction. Ashurbanipal then punished the Arabians, who, in his enforced absence in Babylonia, had invaded Palestine, overrun Edom and Moab, and threatened Damascus. The inscriptions, however, do not come down below b.c. 646, and the last years of the reign are in obscurity. Ashurbanipal appears to have reigned over Babylon as Kandalnu.
(p) Fall of Nineveh.Ashurbanipal was succeeded by Ashur-etil-iiani, his son, who was succeeded by Sin-sharishkun, his brother. We do not know how long they reigned, but in b.c. 606 the Medes captured Nineveh and took the N. half of the Empire, while Nabopolassar, king of Babylon (since b.c. 626?), took Babylonia.
II. Babylonia
1. History.The history of Babylonia, as monumentally attested, falls naturally into periods: (a) the rise of the city-States and their struggle for supremacy; (b) the supremacy of Babylon and the First Babylonian Empire; (c) the Kassite supremacy and the rise of Assyria; (d) the contemporaneous kingdoms of Assyria and Babylonia; (e) the supremacy of Assyria to its fall; (f) the New Babylonian Empire.
(a) The city-States.The prehistoric remains of the earliest settlers in Babylonia are numerous, but they have received no systematic study. The existence of a non-Semitic race, the so-called Sumerians, is at least the most convenient assumption to account for the problems of the earliest history, but it is impossible to decide how early they were intermixed with Semitic folk. It is as yet difficult to decide whether these Semites entered from the S.W., or from the side of Elam, or from N. Mesopotamia. The earliest monuments we possess show a variety of towns, each of which served as a nucleus to a wide area of villages. As populations grew, the needs of pasture for an eminently pastoral people brought about disputes as to boundaries, and wars ensued. The States entered into keen rivalry in other directions, as commerce developed. As early as b.c. 5000 the condition of things may be aptly compared with that of England under the Heptarchy. Eridu, modern Abu Shahrein, lay on the Gulf and W. of the Euphrates mouth. As the seat of the worship of Ea, god of the waters, its business was rather on the sea than on the land, but it was always reverenced as the primitive home of civilization and religion. We have no evidence that it was ever the seat of a kingdom. Some 10 miles to the W. lay Ur, modern Mugheir, then also on the Gulf, the home of the worship of Sin, the moon-god. Across the Euphrates, 30 miles to N.E., lay Larsa, modern Senkereh, where Shamash, the sun-god, was chief god. Twelve miles to the N.W. was Uruk, modern Warka (Erech), with its Ishtar cult. To the N. was Mar, modern Tel Ede. From Mar, 35 miles to the E., on the Shatt-el-Hai canal from the Tigris to the Euphrates, was Shirpurla or Lagash, modern Telloh, with its god Ningirsu. These six cities form the group with whose fortunes most of the Telloh finds are concerned. Nippur, modern Niffer, lay halfway between the Tigris and Euphrates, 60 miles from the Gulf. Its god was the very ancient En-lil, the old Bl, lord of mankind.
In the N. more than 50 miles N.W. of Nippur was Cutha, modern Tel Ibrahim, with its god Nergal, lord of the world of the dead. Further N., on the E. bank of the Euphrates, was Sippar, modern Abu Habba, with its sun-god Shamash. Near by must have been Agade. The monuments place here: Kulunu (Calneh); Uhki, later Opis; and Kish. Later, Babylon (wh. see) and its sister city Borsippa came into importance. In Upper Mesopotamia, Haran was probably not much later in its rise as a commercial capital and centre of the moon-god cult.
The history of this period has many gaps, probably because systematic exploration has been carried out only at Telloh and Nippur. The evidence for other cities consists chiefly of references made by the rulers of these two cities, who either ruled over others or were ruled over by them. A king of Ur might leave offerings at Nippur, or order some building to be done there; or the rulers of Nippur might name the king of Ur as their overlord. Out of such scattered references we must weave what history we can. About b.c. 4500 Eushagsagana, king of Kengi in S.W., offered to Bl of Nippur the spoils of Kish. Later, Mesilim, king of Kish, made Shirpurla a subject State. About b.c. 4200 Ur-Nina was able to call himself king of Shirpurla. Eannatum and Entemena of Shirpurla won several victories over other cities and imposed treaties upon them. Soon Lugalzaggisi, king of Uhki, about b.c. 4200, could call himself king of Erech, Ur, and Larsa. He was practically ruler of the First Babylonian Empire, from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean. About b.c. 3850, Alusharshid, king of Kish, conquered Elam and Barase, to N.E. and E. of Babylonia.
Shargni-shar-ali (Sargon I.), king of Agade, b.c. 3800, and his son Naram-Sin, b.c. 3750 according to Nabonidus, were lords of Nippur, Shirpurla, Kish, Babylon, and Erech, and ruled, or at least levied tribute, from the Mediterranean N. into Armenia, over part of Elam, and S. into Arabia and the islands of the Persian Gulf. About b.c. 3500 Ur-Bau of Shirpurla ruled in peace, as a subject prince, or patesi. Gudea, about b.c. 3100, erected wonderful buildings, evidently had great resources, and even conquered Anshan, in Elam, but was not a king. About b.c. 3000, Ur-Gr and his son Dungi, kings of Ur, built temples not only in Ur but in Kutha, Shirpurla, Nippur, and Erech. A dynasty of Erech and a dynasty of Isin later claimed authority over Nippur, Ur, Eridu, and other less noted cities. The next dynasty of Ur, founded by Gungunu, included Ine-Sin, Bur-Sin II., Gamil-Sin, Dungi II. and others, b.c. 28002500. They warred in Syria, Arabia, and Elam.
(b) Supremacy of Babylon.The First Dynasty of Babylon (b.c. 2396) was founded by Sumu-abi. But Larsa was under its own king Nr-Adad, who was followed by his son Sin-iddinam. The Elamites invaded the land, and under Kudur-nanhundi carried off the goddess Nan from Erech about b.c. 2290. Larsa became the seat of an Elamite king, Rim-Sin, son of Kudur-mabuk, ruler of Iamutbal in W. Elam. He ruled over Ur, Eridu, Nippur, Shirpurla, and Erech, and conquered Isin. He is thought by some to be Arioch of Ellasar who with Chedorlaomer of Elam, Amraphel of Shinar, (Hammurabi?), Tidal of Goiim overthrew the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 14:1-24). At any rate he was expelled from Larsa by Hammurabi in the 31st year of his reign. Hammurabi ruled all Mesopotamia, from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. His reign was the climax of Babylonian civilization and culture. His successors maintained his Empire for a while, but then Babylonia had to submit to foreign conquest. His period is known to us by an enormous number of inscriptions and monuments, and deserves attention as characteristic of Old Babylonia at its best.
The second dynasty has left remarkably few monuments in the districts hitherto explored, and beyond its existence we know little of it.
(c, d, e) Kassite supremacy, and rise of Assyria, etc.The third dynasty rose on the conquest of Babylonia by the Kassites, a mountaineer people from the N.E., of non-Semitic race, thought by many to be Cush in Gen 10:8. The Kassites attempted an invasion as early as the 9th year of Samsu-iluna, but were driven back. They first established themselves in the South, giving the name of Karduniash to it. They adopted the royal titles, worshipped the ancient gods, and wrote in the Babylonian language. The first king of whom we have important inscriptions was Agum-kakrime (Agum II.). He claims to rule over the Kashshu, the Akkadians, Babylonia, Ashnunak, Padan, Alman, and Gutium. He restored the images of Marduk and Zarpanit his consort, which had been carried away to Hani in N. Mesopotamia. Later we learn from the Tell el-Amarna letters that as early as the time of Amenophis III., king of Egypt, Kurigalzu of Babylon was in friendly relations with Egypt, and refused to support a Canaanite conspiracy against its rule. The relations with Assyria have been already dealt with. Kadashman-harbe co-operated with his grandfather in driving out the Sti, who robbed the caravans from the West and Egypt. Kurigalzu II. waged successful war with Elam, captured the king Hurbatila with his own hands, and sacked Susa. With Melishihu and Marduk-apliddina I. Babylonian power revived, but fell again under their successors. The Kassites first gave Babylonia a national name and exalted the worship of Bl of Nippur. In their time, Babylonia had trade relations not only with Mesopotamia Syria, and Egypt, but with Bactria, and possibly China on the E., and with Euba on the West.
(f) New Babylonian Empire.The new Babylonian dynasty was that of Pashe, or Isin, a native dynasty. Nebuchadrezzar I. was apparently its founder. He defeated the Elamites and wrested from them the provinces already occupied by them, and brought back the statue of Bl which they had captured. He also reconquered the West, and left his name on the rocks of the Nahr el-Kelb. His attempts upon Assyria were unsuccessful. Henceforth Babylonia was pent up by Assyria and Elam, and merely held its own. The fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth dynasties yield but a few names, of whose exploits we know next to nothing. The Araman migration swallowed up Mesopotamia and drove back both Assyria and Babylonia. The Chaldans followed the old route from Arabia by Ur, and established themselves firmly in the S. of Babylonia. Akkad was plundered by the Sti. Thus cut off from the West, the absence of Babylonian power allowed the rise of Philistia; Israel consolidated, Phnicia grew into power. Hamath, Aleppo, Patin, Samal became independent States. Damascus became an Araman power. Egypt also was split up, and could influence Palestine but little. When Assyria revived under Adad-nirari, the whole W. was a new country and had to be reconquered. Babylonia had no hand in it. She was occupied in suppressing the Chaldans and Aramans on her borders; and had to call for Assyrian assistance in the time of Shalmaneser. Finally, Tiglath-pileser III. became master of Babylonia, and after him it fell into the hands of the Chaldan Merodach-baladan, till Sargon drove him out. Under Sennacherib it was a mere dependency of Assyria, till he destroyed Babylon. Under Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal Babylonia revived somewhat, and under Nabopolassar found in the weakness of Assyria and the fall of Nineveh a chance to recover.
Nabopolassar reckoned his reign from b.c. 625, but during the early years of his rule some Southern Babylonian cities such as Erech continued to acknowledge Sin-shar-ishkun. According to classical writers, he allied himself with the Medo-Scythian hordes, who devastated Mesopotamia and captured Nineveh. He claims to have chased from Akkad the Assyrians, who from the days of old ruled over all peoples and with their heavy yoke wore out the nations, and to have broken their yoke. The Medes seem to have made no attempt to hold Mesopotamia, and Pharaoh Necho, who was advancing from Egypt to take Syria, was defeated at Carchemish b.c. 605 by Nebuchadrezzar. So Babylonia succeeded to the W. part of the Assyrian Empire. Beyond a few building inscriptions we know little of this reign.
Nebuchadrezzars inscriptions hardly mention anything but his buildings. He fortified Babylon, enriched it with temples and palaces; restored temples at Sippara, Larsa, Ur, Dilbat, Baz, Erech, Borsa, Kutha, Marad; cleaned out and walled with quays the Arahtu canal which ran through Babylon, and dug a canal N. of Sippara. He left an inscription on the rocks at Wady Brissa, a valley N. of the Lebanon Mountains and W. of the upper part of the Orontes; another on a rock N. of the Nahr el-Kelb, where the old road from Arvad passes S. to the cities of the coast. A fragment of his annals states that in his 37th year he fought in Egypt against Amasis.
Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach), his son, was not acceptable to the priests, and was murdered by his brother-in-law Neriglissar, who had married a daughter of Nebuchadrezzar, and was son of Bl-shum-ishkun, the rub-imga. He, too, was occupied chiefly with the temples of his land. Neriglissar was succeeded by his son Labashi-Marduk, a bad character, whom the priests deposed, setting up Nabonidus, a Babylonian. He was an antiquary rather than a king. He rebuilt many of the oldest Babylonian temples, and in exploring their ruins found records which have helped to date early kings, as quoted above. For some reason he avoided Babylon and left the command of the army to his son Belshazzar. The Manda king, Astyages, invaded Mesopotamia, and was repelled only by the aid of Cyrus, king of Anshan, who a little later by his overthrow of Astyages became king of Persia, and then conquered Crsus of Lydia. On the 16th of Tammuz b.c. 539 Cyrus entered Babylon without resistance. Nabonidus was spared and sent to Karmania. Belshazzar was killed. Cyrus was acceptable to the Babylonians, worshipped at the ancient shrines, glorified the gods who had given him leadership over their land and people, made Babylon a royal city, and took the old native titles, but the sceptre had departed from the Semitic world for ever.
2. Literature.Babylonia was very early in possession of a form of writing. The earliest specimens of which we know are little removed from pictorial writing; but the use of flat pieces of soft clay, afterwards dried in the sun or baked hard in a furnace, as writing material, and strokes of a triangular reed, soon led to conventional forms of characters in which the curved lines of a picture were replaced by one or more short marks on the line. These were gradually reduced in number until the resultant group of strokes bore little resemblance to the original. The short pointed wedge-shaped dabs of the reed have given rise to the name cuneiform. The necessities of the engraver on stone led him to reproduce these wedges with an emphasized head that gives the appearance of nails, but all such graphic varieties make no essential difference. The signs denoted primarily ideas: thus the picture of a bull, or a bulls head, would symbolize power, and all the words derived from the root to be powerful, then from the word powerful a syllabic value would be derived which might be used in spelling words. Thus the picture of a star might signify heaven, the supreme god Anu, the idea above, and be used to denote all things high, lofty, or divine; its syllabic value being an it would be used in spelling wherever an had to be written. But, again, as god was ilu, it might be used in spelling for il. Thus many signs have more than one value, even as syllables; they may also denote ideas. The scribes, however, used not far short of 500 signs, and there is rarely any doubt of their meaning. The values attached to the signs in many cases are not derivable from the words which denote their ideas, and it has been concluded that the signs were adopted from a non-Semitic people called the Sumerians. Many inscriptions cannot be read as Semitic, except by regarding them as a sort of halfway development of pictorial writing, and when read syllabically are supposed to be in the Sumerian language, which continued to be used, at any rate in certain phrases, to the last, much as Latin words and abbreviations (like . s. d.) are used by us. There is still great obscurity about this subject, which can be solved only by the discovery of earlier or intermediate inscriptions.
At any rate, we are now able to read with certainty, except for a few obscure expressions, inscriptions which possibly date back to b.c. 6000. The earliest inscriptions hitherto recovered have been from temple archives, and naturally relate to offerings to the gods or gifts to the temples. From very early times, however, contracts such as deeds of sale, dispositions of property, marriage settlements, etc., were preserved in the archives, and many families preserved large quantities of deeds, letters, business accounts, etc. Writing and reading were very widely diffused, even women being well educated in these respects, and we have enormous collections in our museums of material relating to the private life and customs of the people at almost all periods of the history.
The Babylonians early drew up codes of laws, hymns, ritual texts, mythology, and made records of observations in all directions of natural history. The supposed influence of the heavenly bodies led to works associating celestial phenomena with terrestrial eventsthe so-called astrological texts which recorded astronomical observations from very early dates. A wonderful collection of extraordinary events, as births of monsters or abnormal beings, were regarded as ominous, and an attempt was made to connect them with events in national or private history. These omen tablets also deal with morals, attaching to human acts consequences evincing royal or Divine displeasure. Evil conduct was thus placed under a ban, and the punishment of it was assigned to the hand of God or the king. It was a very high morality that was so inculcated: to say yea with the lips and nay in the heart, to use false weights, to betray a friend, to estrange relations, to slander or backbite, are all forbidden. The conduct of a good king, of a good man, of a faithful son of his god, are set out with great care, and culminate in the precept, To him that does thee wrong return a gracious courtesy. Medicine was extensively written upon, and the number of cases prescribed for is very great. We are not able, as a rule, to recognize either the ailment or the prescription; but it seems that magical spells were often used to drive out the demon supposed to be the cause of the disease.
The Babylonians had some acquaintance with mathematics, so far as necessary for the calculation of areas, and they early drew up tables of squares and cubes, as well as of their measures of surface and capacity. To them we owe the division of time into hours, minutes, and seconds. Their measures still lack the fundamental explanation which can be afforded only by finding some measured object with its Babylonian measure inscribed upon it, in a state allowing of accurate modern measures. See Weights and Measures.
3. Religion.The religion of Babylonia was a syncretic result of the union of a number of city and local cults. Consequently Shamash the sun-god; Sin the moon-god; Ishtar, Venus; Marduk the god of Babylon, Nab of Borsippa, Bl of Nippur, Nergal the god of pestilence, Nusku the new-moon crescent, and a host of others, were worshipped with equal reverence by both kings and people. Most men, however, were specially devoted to one god, determined for them by hereditary cult, or possibly personal choice: a man was son of his god and the god was his father. In the course of time almost every god absorbed much of the attributes of every other god, so that, with the exception of such epithets as were peculiarly appropriate to him, Shamash could be addressed or hymned in much the same words as Marduk or Sin. By some teachers all the gods were said to be Marduk in one or other manifestation of his Divine activity. The whole pantheon became organized and simplified by the identification of deities originally distinct, as a result of political unification or theological system. The ideal of Divinity was high and pure, often very poetic and beautiful, but the Babylonian was tolerant of other gods, and indisposed to deny the right of others to call a god by another name than that which best summed up for him his own conception.
Magic entered largely into the beliefs and practices of life, invading religion in spite of spiritual authority. The universe was peopled with spirits, good and bad, who had to be appeased or propitiated. Conjurations, magic spells, forecasts, omens were resorted to in order to bind or check the malign influences of demons. The augurs, conjurers, magicians, soothsayers were a numerous class, and, though frowned upon by the priests and physicians, were usually called in whenever disease or fear suggested occult influence. The priest was devoted to the service of his god, and originally every head of a family was priest of the local god, the right to minister in the temple descending in certain families to the latest times. The office was later much subdivided, and as the temple became an overwhelming factor in the city life, its officials and employees formed a large part of the population. A temple corresponded to a monastery in the Middle Ages, having lands, houses, tenants, and a host of dependants, as well as enormous wealth, which it employed on the whole in good deeds, and certainly threw its influence on the side of peace and security. Although distinct classes, the judges, scribes, physicians, and even skilled manufacturers were usually attached to the temple, and priests often exercised these functions. Originally the god, and soon his temple, were the visible embodiment of the city life. The king grew out of the high priest. He was the vicegerent of the god on earth, and retained his priestly power to the last, but he especially represented its external aspect. He was ruler, leader of the army, chief judge, supreme builder of palaces and temples, guardian of right, defender of the weak and oppressed, accessible to the meanest subject. The expansion of city territory by force of arms, the growth of kingdoms and rise of empires, led to a military caste, rapacious for foreign spoils, and domestic politics became a struggle for power between the war party of expansion and conquest and the party of peace and consolidation.
The Babylonian Literature was extensive, and much of it has striking similarities to portions of the Bible (see Creation, Deluge, etc.). It also seems to have had influence upon classical mythology.
ADDITIONAL NOTE TO ARTICLE ASSYRIA AND BABYLONIA.
Since the article Assyria and Babylonia was put into type, the appearance of Mr. L. W. Kings Chronicles concerning Early Babylonian Kings, and Professor H. V. Hilprechts Chronological Tablets from the Temple Library at Nippur have made public a considerable amount of additional information as to early Babylonian and Assyrian history. A new set of synchronisms is established and new rulers are restored, while the chronology is considerably affected. A mere sketch of the new facts is all that can be attempted here. Three new rulers, Ilu-eliati, Enmennunna, and Apil-kishshu, must be placed centuries before the first dynasty of Babylonia, almost doubling the historic period. The period of Sargon and Naram-Sin is more fully made known, the latters conquest of Magan being especially important. Sargon aggrandized Agade at the expense of Babylon, already the seat of Marduk worship. The dynasty of Ur, founded by Ur-Engur (or Ur-Gur), can now be set out completely as follows:
Ur-Engurreigned18years
Dungi, his sonreigned58years
Bur-Sin, his sonreigned9years
Gimll-Sin, his sonreigned7years
Ibi-Sin, his sonreigned25years
For the reign of Dungi we have the additional information that be cared greatly for Eridu, which was on the shore of the sea, and that he sacked Babylon. Gudea was his contemporary at Shirpula. On the fall of this dynasty the power passed to Isin, where the following dynasty reigned. The place of Gungunu is not certain.
Ishbi-Urrareigned32years
Gimil-ilishu, his sonreigned10years
Idin-Dagan, his sonreigned21years
Ishme-Dagan, his sonreigned20years
Libit-Ishtar, his sonreigned11years
Ur-Ninibreigned28years
Bur-Sin, his sonreigned21years
Iter-Kasha, his sonreigned5years
?, his brotherreigned7years
Sin reigned6years
Bl-bnireigned24years
Zame reigned3years
?reigned5years
Ea reigned4years
Sin-magirreigned11years
Damki-ilishu, his sonreigned23years
This last king has been thought to he a contemporary of Ammiditana, who, in the last year of his reign, destroyed the wall of Isin which the men of Damkiilishu had erected. But the reference may be to the third king of the second dynasty; and in any case is not very clear.
Two new names, Urra-imitti and Bl-ibni, are now to be placed high in the list of Assyrian kings. The latter was a gardener whom Urra-imitti raised to be his successor. They appear to have preceded Ilu-shuma, whom we now know to have been king of Assyria and contemporary with Sumu-abi, founder of the first dynasty of Babylon. Sulili may be another form of the name of Sumu-la-ilu, the second king of this dynasty, who thus reigned over Assyria as well.
We further learn that Hammurabis conquest of Rim-Sin was not final, for Samsu-iluna had to fight with him again. Samsu-iluna also fought with Ilu-ma-ilu, who was king of the Sea-land, and Abshu later waged indecisive war with him. In the time of Samsu-satana the Hittites invaded the land of Akkad. Ea-gamll, the last king of the second dynasty apparently, and king of the Sea-land, attacked Elam, but was defeated and deposed by the brother of Bitiliashu the Kassite. Agum, son of Bitiliashu, then conquered the Sea-land. These synchronisms, if the proposed Identifications of the rulers named are correct, show that the second dynasty was contemporary partly with the first, partly with the third, and consequently that the dates of the first dynasty must be lowered. Whether the Kassite dynasty directly followed Samsu-satana is still uncertain.
Later, we learn that Adad-apliddina was an Araman usurper, and that in his reign the Sutu nomads ravaged Sumer and Akkad. The name of the Elamite who formed the seventh dynasty was Ae-aplusur. A new Tiglath-pileser has to be added to the kings of Assyria. He was the father of Ashur-dan ii. and son of Ashur-resh-ishi ii., grandson of Ashur-rabl ii. Hence the Tiglath-pileser of b.c. 731 becomes iv. Merodach-baladan, the son of Baladan, Marduk apliddina iii., was the son of Nabu-shum We get fresh information as to the troubled times in Babylonia after Sennacherib destroyed Babylon; and the name of Erba-Marduk (who dispossessed the Aramans from the estates which they had seized in Babylon and Borsippa, and restored E-sagila and E-zida, the temples of Marduk and Nabu) is, with others, rescued to history.
The changes which these new facts involve are likely to give rise to much discussion, and will probably not be settled till we have still further Information.
C. H. W. Johns.