HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN
BY
GEORGE G. CAMERON
I. Historical Beginnings
CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS
WHEN Babylonian scribes reduced to written word the
myths and legends of antiquity, they told of the world’s creation, of kings
enthroned for reigns of fabulous length, and of a mighty flood which threatened
entirely to depopulate the earth. They told how kingship, after the waters had
receded, descended from heaven upon the city Kish in northern Babylonia, where
ruled a dynasty of long-lived sovereigns. Their lists make dry reading, for the
names of the kings with their lengths of rule alone are given. Of the
twenty-first ruler of this dynasty, however, a significant fact is related, a
fact which to the scribes was the first political event after the Flood. Enmenbaragesi, we are informed, subdued Elam. Eventually
the sovereignty of Kish yielded to that of Uruk in southern Babylonia, but Elam
had still to be dealt with. It is reported that Meskengasher, founder of the
new dynasty, descended to the sea and ascended the mountain, statements which
may refer to the Persian Gulf and the Elamite highlands. Traditions other than
those preserved in the king lists declared that in the times of Lugalbanda and Dumuzi, the third and fourth kings of this dynasty, the
Elamites invaded Babylonia from their mountains. With sad hearts the scribes
were forced to record the fact that considerably later the kingship deserted
Uruk for Awan, definitely an Elamite city. For a time a second dynasty at Kish
restored the sovereignty to Babylonia, but the succeeding rule in the city Hamazi suggests a return of power to the highlands north of
Elam. Finally, when the kingship once more returned to grace the city Kish
under the ruler Utug, omitted from the scribal lists, reverberations of the
struggles between Elamite highlanders and Babylonians may be referred to in an
inscription of Lugal-anne-mundu of Adab, who warred with Elam, Marhashi,
and Gutium.
So far we have been dealing with legends, or with
shadowy figures who stand on the borderline between legend and history.
Discoveries of recent years have transferred several other supposedly legendary
characters to the realm of actual history, and some lucky chance may do the
same for the individuals mentioned above. For the present we can only quote the
statements about them as they have come down to us, and indicate possible
solutions.
Fortunately for the historian, from this time forward
contemporary royal inscriptions verify and supplement the traditions or
separate from them the actual events. Our most complete records for a short
time emanate from the Babylonian city-state Lagash, where a dynasty was begun
by Ur-Nanshe. Although the founder brought down
objects from the mountains, he may have had no significant contacts with the
Elamites. One of his successors, Eannatum, was a far more energetic ruler, or
so his inscriptions would have us believe. These tell us that he vanquished the
marvelous mountain Elam and heaped up mounds of the slain; he defeated the ishakku, or princes, of two Elamite cities when Elam
and all the other countries revolted, he drove the Elamite back to his land,
which he conquered. These are great claims. Though we may wonder whether the
Elamites were not invaders rather than rebels, there is also proof that the
wars of Eannatum were not wholly defensive; a support for a battle mace
brought, doubtless as booty, from the first Elamite city to be made subject was
inscribed in Lagash by Dudu, priest of the city’s deity Ningirsu. Nevertheless,
it is certain that Elamite raiding parties subsequently penetrated deep into
Babylonia, for in the time of Enetarzi, third ishakku after Eannatum, a band of six hundred
Elamites actually plundered Lagash.
The Elamite royal city from which such sorties
descended into Babylonia was Awan. The Sumerian scribes, by recording in their
lists a postdiluvian dynasty in this city, preserved for posterity their knowledge
that throughout the early periods of history Awan was pre-eminent in the
eastern land. They also recognized the fact that Susa at this time was only
commercially important. We ourselves learn from the baked-clay documents found
at Susa, written in the proto-Elamite language, that this metropolis already
had a local history; but its political fate was inextricably bound up with the
city Awan, where there now (ca. 2670 B.C.) began to rule a dynasty of kings,
twelve in number.
Peli founded the dynasty; and, if names are to be trusted, his immediate successors
were all pure Elamites. To us these rulers—Tata, Ukku-tahesh,
Hi-shur, Shushun-tarana, Napi-ilhush, and Kikku-sime-temti—are
no more than names, though we might, with some degree of probability, ascribe
to one of them an inscription since found on Liyan,
modern Bushire, an island in the Persian Gulf. Fragmentary though it is, this
text with its archaic signs is yet proof that by the time of Sargon of Agade
the Elamites had adopted the Sumerian script to write their own language. With
the eighth member of the dynasty, Luhhi-ishshan, and
his successor, Hishepratep, we step for the first
time into the full light of history, for they were contemporary with one of the
most colorful figures of ancient times, Sargon, king of Agade (ca,
2530-2475 B.C.).
Shortly after his accession to the throne, Sargon laid
plans to overthrow the power of the eastern mountaineers. He presaged an attack
upon them by a conquest of the district Kazallu east
of the Tigris. Slightly beyond Kazallu was Der,
modern Badrah, important as commanding an outlet from the mountains and not yet
accounted a really Babylonian city. Its capture led him to more truly Elamite
territory; and, in an inscription which does not attempt to be a topographical
description of his march, he lists the individuals whom he has encountered and
the cities from which he has obtained booty. Here are enumerated various rulers
of Barahshi: Ul .... and Sidgau, both shakkanakku’s or governors; Kunduba, a judge; and Dagu, a brother of the king of Barahshi.
Zina, the ishakku or prince of Huhunuri, and Hidarida, the ishakku of Gunilaha, are
both mentioned, as are the cities Saliamu, Karne . . . . , Heni, and Bunban(?). These were but lesser figures in the contest;
the list now proceeds to mention the chief actors in the drama, Sanam-Shimut, an ishakku of
Elam, and Luh-ishan, whom Sargon’s ill-informed
scribes called the son of Hiship-rashir and king of
Elam. We know him better as Luhhi-ishshan, the eighth
king of Awan, who was the successor, if not the son of Kikku-sime-temti,
and whose own son was Hiship-rashir or, rather, Hishep-ratep. Sargon’s scribes did know, however, of Awan,
for it together with Susa closes the enumeration.
Somewhat later another venture into the east proved
even more successful. Once more Sargon engaged with Sidgau and Kundub a of Barahshi,
who were now joined by an ishakku of Shirihum, and with Sanam-Shimut and Luhhi-ishshan. The latter may have been killed,
for shortly afterward “Hishiprashir, king of Elam,”
in whom we recognize Hishepratep, sent tribute to the
warrior of Agade through the hand of Hibabri; and, if
we may judge from the fact that a stele of Sargon has been found at Susa, this
city itself appears to have been captured.
By this achievement Sargon was free to undertake
additional conquests in the lands north of Elam. A geographical treatise on his
empire furnishes the names of many districts in this region which later scribes
alleged he had subdued. There we find Lubdu in the
land of Arrapha, which is the district surrounding
the modern town Kirkuk, besides “the way of the upper and lower Zab” and the
lands Lullubium and Gutium. These lay north of the
present Diyala River, whose place of exit from the mountains was eventually
known by the Elamites as Ialman and which here
appears as the land Arman. In addition to these, the lands Nikkum and Der to the south of this river are mentioned; and in a final summary Marhashi (better known as Barahshi), Tukrish, Elam, and Anshan are named. We may accept as
fact Sargon’s conquest of the majority of the lands enumerated, but we must ask
for further evidence before including in his empire Lullubium,
Gutium, and Tukrish, all of which, like Anshan, lay
within the Zagros boundary range.
Like so many empires which expand too rapidly,
Sargon’s crumbled at the first sign of revolt; and he himself was its victim.
Arrayed against his successor, Rimush, were even Babylonian princes, among them
the ishakku of Kazallu, Asharid, and the king, the ishakku,
and the great sukkal or “messenger” of Der.
But Rimush, like Sargon, bore the stamp of the conqueror. Quickly he brought
all Babylonia under control; then he too looked eastward. In that direction
Elam, or rather Awan, was naturally his chief opponent; and Awan had asked and
received support from the shakkanakku of the
land Zahara and from Barahshi,
where Sidgau was still shakkanakku under his king Abalgamash. Valiant as their
resistance may have been, the cause of the highlanders was a lost one. Rimush
himself proudly claims the victory; the modern excavator proves his claim by
unearthing in Babylonia booty from the conquest of Elam and Barahshi:
vases at Nippur, once presented to Enlil, and vases and a macehead at Ur, formerly offered to Sin.
Susa fell to the warriors of Rimush; and when Rimush
was succeeded by Manishtusu it was in this city that an Elamite, Uba, dedicated
a bust of his new suzerain to Narute, a local deity.
Cylinder seals inform us that Uba was actually the ishakku of Elam. No more is heard of the kings of Awan, though Elamite antiquaries
named Helu as the successor to Hishep-ratep.
Perhaps he was active in Anshan and Shirihum, the
mountains north and northeast of Elam, where the Assyrians were to find the
land Parsumash and into which the Iranian Chishpish or Teispes entered
about 675 B.C. For Manishtusu divided his troops and sent one army into this
region; successful, his warriors brought the defeated king back to Babylonia
and led him in triumph before Shamash in Sippar. The other army crossed the
Persian Gulf to the Persian coast, where it defeated the warriors from
thirty-two cities; the whole region was devastated up to the mines of precious
metals, and the way was opened for the transportation of diorite and valuable
ores from the Persian coast of the Gulf to Babylonia.
Mountaineers do not, however, yield up their freedom
without a struggle. The Zagros highlanders, grown hardy from attempting to eke
out an existence in the scarped mountains, might be expected to revolt more
than once against foreign domination. This actually happened at the death of
Manishtusu. Their attempt to break away from or to avoid subservience to the
new ruler, Naram-Sin, had its ramifications in the
nearby lowlands of Babylonia, where Kazallu, Timtab, and Awak rebelled. Being
nearer to Agade, they were perhaps the more easily subdued; but the opposition
presented to Naram-Sin by peoples to the north and
east may well have been more ominous. Near modern Altun Koprii a little kingdom known as Shimurrum,
now ruled by Puttimadal, was actively hostile. In the
land Namar, later known as Namri,
in the central Zagros, Arisen, son of Sadarmat, had
only recently declared himself king of Urkish and Namar; the present ruler, Inbir,
had no desire to lose his independence. Another enemy was to be found in Hubshumkibi, the king of Marhashi or Barahshi. It is even possible that Hita, named by the Elamite scribes as the eleventh king of
Awan, had induced some of these rulers to join him in one last desperate effort
against Agade. Naram-Sin was more than a match for
them; the lands to the north came definitely under his control, and even Elam
and Barahshi were subdued.
The new master was not, however, merely a destroyer.
Susa, constantly under the impact of Babylonian civilization, was rapidly
becoming Akkadianized; there Naram-Sin
with his inscribed bricks erected buildings in which he placed his own statues,
as well as vases from the spoil of Magan. There he
installed his own ishakku, Enammune,
that the region might be held constantly loyal.
The language of the Susa documents of this period, no
less than the personal names, illustrates clearly the effects of such a
benevolent policy upon the district. The Akkadian language largely supplants
the Elamite, and even the names are mostly Semitic. These documents, among
which there are letters, syllabaries, and lists of armor in addition to the
usual sales, exchanges, and salary payments, throw a vivid light on the
commercial relationships of the period, for the cities Shuruppak and Awal and the land Barahshi are all mentioned, as
is Umma, whose ishakku is known by name.
In other regions of greater Elam the native language
and culture remained unaffected, in proof of which there is a treaty between a
native king, most probably Hita, and Naram-Sin, written in Elamite. This begins with an
invocation to numerous gods; of the Elamite deities mentioned, those best known
from later texts are Pinikir, Huban, Nahiti or Nahhunte, Inshushinak, Shimut, Hurbi, Hutran, and Narude or Narute. Amal, Ninkarak, and perhaps Ninurta appear to be the only foreign
gods invoked, and even these may have borne Elamite names. The invocation is
followed by an oath: “The enemy of Naram-Sin is my
enemy, the friend of Naram-Sin is my friend.” The
Elamite is obviously admitting his vassalage to the ruler of Agade.
By his defeat of the kings of Shimurrum and Namar, Naram-Sin came
into direct contact with the inhabitants of the northern and central Zagros.
These were the peoples of Lullubium and Curium, of
whom Sargon before him may have heard, who spoke Caucasian languages related
to, but distinct from, Elamite. The Lullubi were
secure in their possession of a fertile plain within the mountains, the Shehrizor, administered in modern times from the town of Sulaimaniyah. Their marauding bands could easily interfere
with the customary traffic along the Babylonian road now marked by the towns of Kifri, Kirkuk, and Altun Koprü. Tradition knew of a king of the Lullubi named Immashkush preceding Sargon; their ruler in the
days of Naram-Sin offered battle to the Babylonian in
a gorge of the “Black Mountain,” called today the “Pagan’s Pass,” south of the Shehrizor. The Lullubian was
hopelessly defeated, and to commemorate the victory the king of Agade carved on
the walls of the gorge a relief, the prototype of the better-known “Stele of
Victory.” A wholly different outcome resulted from Naram-Sin’s
attack on the Guti, for these barbarians, soon to
overrun all Babylonia and to bring an end to his dynasty, inflicted upon him a
crushing defeat.
In Elam proper, Naram-Sin
knew how to reward long years of faithful service; Enammune,
once merely the ishakku of Elam, became shakkanakku, or governor, of the land, and as such
made a new official seal. Perhaps the post he relinquished fell to a deserving
Elamite, Puzur-Inshushinak, son of Shimbi-ishhuk, who first appears as the ishakku of Susa. Eager to please his masters, this prince at first wrote his
inscriptions in Akkadian only, but soon he was putting alongside of this
language his own protoElamite. Perhaps with the
death or removal of Enammune, he too became shakkanakku of Elam; but if the new office implied
an increase of power, it meant also an extension of his sphere of activities,
for we find him embarking upon foreign conquest. Not improbably he declared to Naram-Sin that he was merely subjecting vassals who had
been disobedient to the lord of Agade. On a statue presented to his god he
states that when Kimash and Hurtum made war against him, he conquered them and ravaged Hupshana.
Since Kimash was far up in the Zagros at a point
opposite Kirkuk and Hurtum is possibly that Humurtum so familiar from Third Ur Dynasty date formulas, Naram-Sin might well have been wary, for it was into
territory at least nominally his that Puzur-Inshushinak was entering. The Elamite also claims that he conquered over sixty other sites.
Although these are enumerated apparently without topographical order, we may
still gain some history from their names. Possible mention of Kashshen may be our earliest reference to the land from
which the Kassites took their name. Gutu surely attests contact with the Gutians or with the land whence their hordes descended
upon Babylonia. Shilwan suggests the mountainous
country east of ancient Der near modern Sirwan. The
land Huhunuri was soon to be familiar from date
formulas of the Third Dynasty of Ur, and Mu Turran may be the Me Turnat of the Assyrian annals, a
city on the modern Diyala River. Separate mention is made of the king of Simash, who came from afar to seize the feet of Puzur-Inshu-shinak.
Booty from the humbled cities enriched Susa, and a new
temple to Inshushinak crowned the acropolis. For its
foundation deposit Puzur-Inshushinak decreed four magi of silver, emblems of silver and gold, a long dagger, and a great ax whose
sides were overlaid with silver. With magnificent ceremony a fine new statue of
the deity was brought to the site on a new canal leading from the city Sidari. In his honor two sheep were sacrificed daily, and
at his gate musicians sang morning and evening. We are told all this by a stele
with an Akkadian inscription, which further declares that Puzur-Inshushinak gave righteous judgment to the city. From the wreck of the temple a lion-headed
block, inscribed in Akkadian and in the still undecipherable proto-Elamite, has
survived to our day. Clay cones commemorated the erection of a dwelling for the
god Shugu on behalf of Inshushinak;
but alabaster statuettes, fashioned with the boast that they were neither of
silver nor of copper, were dedicated to deities other than the local god, and
on some of these the Akkadian inscription is supplemented by a proto-Elamite
text. In the curses which he invokes against those who would damage his
monuments, Puzur-Inshushinak calls upon Inshushinak, Narite or Narute, and Natl of the Elamite deities, and upon Shamash,
Nergal, Ishtar and Sin, Enlil and Ea, and Ninhursag of the Babylonian gods. Some of the latter may
have had Elamite epithets, for the proto-Elamite texts themselves indicate that
the ruler was attempting to revive the national feeling of his subjects.
If this were indeed his purpose, he was wise to wait
until the death of his nominal lord in Babylonia. When Naram-Sin
gave place to Sharkalisharri, the Elamite declared
his independence with a vengeance. Allied with Zahara,
the land which had previously aided Elam and Barahshi against Rimush, he invaded Babylonia early in the reign of the new sovereign;
his troops were driven back only after they had penetrated to the territory of Opis in the very center of Akkad. Fortified by this
success—for safe return from an invasion into the land of the king of Agade,
the king of the “Four World-Quarters” could be considered nothing less than a
triumph—Puzur-Inshu- shinak was at once crowned king of Awan, as successor of Hita.
As for Sharkalisharri, it is no wonder that he was
thereafter merely “King of Agade,” while the Elamite Puzur-Inshushinak tells how in one year Inshushinak looked with favor
upon him, the mighty king of Awan, and granted to him the “Four World-Regions.”
Meanwhile the peoples of the central Zagros had become
restless. To highlanders such as themselves the lowlands of Babylonia seemed
always most desirable. From afar they watched the fertile plain teeming with
activity, until desire or need became too strong, or new peoples appeared from
their rear to drive them forward. Then irresistibly they poured into the rich
land which lay before them. For a time they obtained control; more and more,
however, they themselves became subject to the higher civilization which they
found in the new habitat, and succumbed to its inexorable influences.
So it was with the people of Lullubium.
From their central point, the Shehrizor, they
advanced southeastward to the district Holwan, where
a relief of their king Anubanini has been found at Zohab near Sar-i-Pul. His inscription is in the Akkadian script and
language; as the mighty king, king of Lullubium, he
declares that he has set up his own image and that of Ishtar on Mount Batir, and with a good Babylonian curse he calls upon Anu
and Antum, Enlil and Ninlil, Adad and Ishtar, Sin and
Shamash, and other deities to preserve his monument. In later times tradition
assigned him to the ranks of the kings of Gutium and finally made him a king of
the city Kutha. As a horrible monster he figured in a
legend which illustrates the impression made by Guti barbarians upon the inhabitants of Babylonia. Not far distant from his relief
is the stele of Tardunni, son of Ikki,
also bearing an Akkadian inscription which invokes Shamash and Adad. Tardunni must be placed in the same period and may likewise
have been a king of Lullubium.
Perhaps the Guti, who seem
to have lived north of the Shehrizor, were
responsible for this advance of the Lullubi. They too
longed for possession of the Land of the Two Rivers, and their victory over Naram-Sin some years before had given them confidence.
Their masses poured into Babylonia, striking a glancing blow at their southern
neighbors, but never pausing in their headlong dash for the region most to be
desired. Sharkalisharri valiantly attempted to stem
the tide; one of his year formulas records an expedition against them, another
the capture of Sharlak, their king. But his efforts
were useless, and he himself became their prey. Shortly after his death, even
the ghost of independent rule in the cities disappeared; and the period
following his reign was one of such anarchy that it became known under the
suggestive designation: “Who was king? Who was not king?”
About the same time, the Elamites and their dynasty of
Awan disappear from the stage of oriental history. Puzur-Inshushinak was the twelfth and last king of Awan, and with his sudden eclipse the land is
enshrouded in darkness. Babylonia and Elam alike appear to have been inundated
by the Gutian tide.
CHAPTER II. THE BABYLONIAN DYNASTS AND KINGS OF SIMASH
THE peoples of Gutium who overwhelmed Babylonia in the
twenty-fifth century B.C. appear indeed to have been barbarians. Later authors
hurl fierce invectives against them, and apparently these were not altogether
unwarranted. It was said that they antagonized the gods, carried off the
sovereignty of Sumer to the mountains, and established enmity and wickedness in
the land. From the viewpoint of the Babylonian, schooled in the virtues of law
and order, no greater accusation could be brought against any people than that
they lacked the firm hand of a rightful sovereign. Yet it was said of the Guti that they had no ruler before they entered the
lowlands. We may attribute this statement to the fact that Sharkalisharri captured their king, Sharlak, and excuse it on that
account; but we cannot pardon their overthrow of the administrative and
economic order, which is indicated by the dearth of Babylonian records.
Little is known about the Gutian rule in Babylonia save the names of their kings in two dynastic lists. A few
scattered inscriptions of sovereigns who do not appear in those records tell us
but little of their makers. The lists themselves disagree; and, although the
brief reigns which are given to the individual kings indicate a period of
intense unrest and inner combat, these figures are all suspiciously alike and
arouse distrust. One record says that the invaders controlled the land for 124
years; another insists that the correct total is 125 years and 40 days. It is
impossible to doubt the proven ability of Babylonian mathematicians; yet our
addition of the separate reigns totals only 91 years and 40 days, leaving an
unexplained balance of 34 years. From these facts it should be clear that there
is much yet to be learned concerning the period of Gutian domination.
Toward the end of the period the barbarians appear to
have come under the persistent and prevailing influence of Babylonian culture.
Perhaps we may assign to this time those kings who have left their own inscriptions
but whose names do not appear in the king lists of the native scribes. Lasirab, king of Gutium, called upon the god of Gutium as
well as Ishtar and Sin to guard a macehead upon which
he inscribed an Akkadian text. To his title another ruler, named Erridupizir, added “King of the Four World-Regions” when he
dedicated an object to Enlil of Nippur.
Strange as it may appear, some of the Babylonian
cities seem to have enjoyed a renewal of prosperity under the foreign rule. In
these the ishakku’s of the older races
apparently retained control, though they fully acknowledged the sovereignty of
the invaders. One of these cities was Umma, whose ishakku Lugal-annadu tells us that while Sium was king of
Gutium there was welfare in the land for thirty-five years. Nammahni,
another ishakku of the same place, rebuilt an
old temple of Ninurra at the time Arlagan was his ruler; and a scribe of Umma dedicated a votive plaque to his king, Saratigubisin.
Tirigan,
a Gutian king whose name was given to several cities
within the empire, reigned but forty days before he fell a prey to the hate and
violence of a native prince. The rule of Gutium was over. Immediately whatever
unity had existed within the kingdom disappeared, and tiny independent states
arose in the Zagros regions and in Elam as well as in Babylonia. To us some of
these principalities are old friends known from the days of Sargon or of Puzur- Inshushinak of Awan.
Others are new, to whom the fall of Gutium for the first time gave freedom.
Far to the north, near the foothills of the Zagros,
was Urbillum, more famous as Arbela, whose name still
lingers as Erbil. South of this was Shimurrum, at
modern Altun Koprii, the
main crossing of the Lower Zab River. South of this again was Harshe, perhaps the Hurshitum of
the Babylonians, at the village known today as Tuz Khurmatli. In the mountains east of Kirkuk, Kimash once more became turbulent. Remnants of the Lullubi banded together within the central Zagros, and the
adjacent land Ganhar proved that it too could be
troublesome. Farther south Marhashi, known in
Akkadian as Barahshi, began once more to rear its
head; and in her low plain it would seem that even Susa declared for
independence. Northeast of Elam a self-reliant state arose in Anshan; and in Simash, a land perhaps not far distant, which had sent
tribute to Puzur- Inshushinak,
the ruler Girnamme founded a new dynasty. Any
Babylonian sovereign who would bring unity to the Near East must subdue many of
these city-states; the effort would demand constant warfare and recourse to
numerous political intrigues.
The Babylonian ruler who overthrew the Guti was himself subjected by Ur-Nammu (2290 B.C.), who founded the Third Dynasty of Ur. His successor, Shulgi (2272-2226 B.C.), began that policy of expansion
which brought under the control of Ur many of the states just enumerated. In
his seventh year Shulgi restored the god Sataran to the temple at Der, and in his eighth he returned Numushda to the shrine in Kazallu.
The reason is obvious: the dominance of Ur was so universally recognized by the
cities within Babylonia proper that local deities could be established in their
own dwellings without danger of revolt by the separate districts.
Now began a determined effort to explore the east and the
north. From Der it was an easy march to Marhashi, to
whose ishakku Shulgi married his own daughter in the fourteenth year. The ravaging of Ganhar in the twenty-second year initiated a series of
raids against the Lullubi. Shimurrum on the Lower Zab was attacked in the twenty-third and twentyfourth years, and Harshe in the twenty-fifth.
By this time Shulgi felt
capable of bringing the states which lay beyond the Zagros boundary range under
his control; in his twenty-eighth year he married a daughter to the ishakku of Anshan, perhaps Libum or Shalabum—an act which should imply the latter’s
vassalage. The kingdom of Simash, now ruled by Tazitta I, was apparently untouched. Returning to the
north, Shulgi ravaged Shimurrum for the third time in his thirtieth year, and Ganhar for the second and third times in the twenty-ninth and thirty-first,
respectively. In the interim Anshan, possibly supported by Tazitta of Simash, revolted and had to be won back in the
thirty-second. In the attempt to preserve control of this region Shalhuni was established as shakkanakku of Zabum; but a little later we hear of a second
devastation of Anshan, the war against which was apparently a failure.
In the latter years of the reign, attack was concentrated
on the restless northern districts. Far from Ur, and belonging to a hostile
race, the peoples of these regions were unwilling to accept domination by the
south, and their determined resistance finds its echo in the date formulas. Shashrum was entered in the fortieth year; Shimurrum and Lullubium were
ravaged for the ninth time in the forty-second. In the forty-third, Shimurrum, Lullubium, Ganhar, and Urbillum felt the
hand of the conqueror; while Kimash and Humurtum, probably the Hurtum of
earlier fame, were penetrated in the forty-fourth. As the most important border
fortress guarding the eastern mountains, Der received a shakkanakku by the forty-sixth year, in which we hear once more of a devastation of Harshe, Kimash, and Humurtum.
While all these raids into foreign lands were being
carried out, Susa and her lowlands appear to have been completely under Shulgi’s control. The city may have been won at the time he
first entered Anshan, that is, in his twenty-eighth year, for we first hear of
an ishakku of Susa, Urkium,
in the thirty-first. Thereafter the story is more easily told from Shulgi’s own texts in the city. He erected a new temple for Inshushinak, the god of Susa, and a new dwelling for
the goddess Ninhursag, known to Elamites since the
days of the last king of Awan. His bricks, inscribed bronze statuettes, and
stone tablets were still to be found on the Susian acropolis a millennium later
when Shilhak-Inshushinak used them for foundation
deposits, and again after another five hundred years when the neo-Elamite
rulers employed them for the same purpose; even Shulgi himself can hardly have expected such honor. To the great lady Ningal he inscribed a precious pearl while two of his subordinates
in the city, Ur-niginmu and Nin-kisalshu,
presented to the “Lady of the City” a macehead for
his life.
From this time forward, almost to the exclusion of the
more truly Elamite regions such as Anshan and Simash,
the influence of Ur reigned supreme in Susa and the adjacent districts. As
“Elam,” this territory became the province of Ur par excellence. Multitudes
of men-at-arms for the protection of caravans, couriers bearing royal messages, ishakku, and occasionally men of even
higher rank such as sukkallu’s or
plenipotentiaries, traversed Babylonia between the royal capital and this land,
receiving at the various cities en route the
provisions necessary for their journey; the records of their transit are found
in hundreds of contemporary clay documents. The Elamites, not to be outdone,
entered actively into the comparatively new but wealth-producing commerce; and
hundreds entered Babylonia to take part in numerous business ventures. Thus the
same documents mention Elamites from Susa, Anshan, Simash or Shimash, Huhunuri, Marhashi, and many other cities, while Zabum and Adamdun figure no less prominently. Of Adamdun, the name of which is possibly derived from the
Elamite name for Elam, we even know of two ishakku’s in the reign of Shulgi. These are Uba in the
forty-first year and Riba in the forty-fourth. We may
never know how far Ur’s control extended beyond this low plain into Iran, but
we may be perfectly certain that its influence was keenly felt deep within the
hinterland.
The death of a ruler is always the signal for an
outbreak of restless peoples; it was a striking tribute to Shulgi’s administrative ability that this region accepted without a struggle his
successor Bur-Sin (2225-2217). For three years the new sovereign allowed the
officials of Shulgi to remain unmolested; then he
began to replace them with men of his own choosing. In his fourth year a new ishakku of Susa, Zariqum,
was inducted into office with great ceremony in the presence of ten important
witnesses; his contemporary Nagidda was already the ishakku of Adamdun. From
the fourth year onward Libanug-shabash was to be
found in Marhashi, with Busham in Simanum by the sixth year. An individual with the
Semitic name Sharrum-bani, established in Awak by the fifth year, remained there till the second year
of Ibi-Sin, a period of sixteen years, while Ur-ishkur likewise was retained in Hamazi from Bur-Sin’s seventh year to the second of Gimil-Sin.
Such long tenures of office bespeak peace and quiet in the land.
This was not true of the central and northern Zagros,
where a series of revolts and suppressions harried the country. Bur-Sin
plundered Urbillum in the second year, Shashrum in the sixth, and Huhunuri and Iaprum in the seventh. Perhaps after this
frightful lesson, Huhunuri received Simhuzia as ishakku, with
definite instructions to remain loyal. Farther north, in the region east and
south of modern Kirkuk, Hunnini carried on as the ishakku of Kimash and shakkanakku of Madga; to
him Ugugu dedicated a cylinder seal.
Our sources become fewer with the reign of Gimil-Sin (2216-2208), although one cannot on that account
say that the kingdom was already in decline. To be sure, Simanum had to be invaded in the third year; and Zabshalu,
within Babylonia proper at no great distance from the capital, appears to have
revolted in the seventh, for it too was plundered. But we hear of an ishakku of Humurtum, Hubamersili, in the first year; and a daughter of the king
was sent, apparently in marriage, to the ishakku of Zabshalu after its subjection. These events assume
the maintenance of law and order. As early as the second year we learn of
supplies which the daughter of the king took into Anshan, doubtless as part of
her marriage dowry. Anshan, then, had been attacked; we hear of this war from
another source than the date formulas, namely, from the well-known inscriptions
of Gudea, ishakku of Lagash from perhaps the
eighth year of Bur-Sin to at least the sixth year of Gimil-Sin.
Curiously enough, Gudea fails to acknowledge any
superior; in the document which mentions his only war, this very conquest of
Anshan in Elam, there is no hint that the campaign was carried out in the train
of Gimil-Sin. He does inform us that Elamites came
from Elam and Susians from Susa to aid him in reconstructing
the temple of his god. We have, therefore, definite evidence that in the time
of Gudea and Gimil-Sin Anshan, the Elamite highlands,
and the Susian plain were all under Babylonian overlordship.
Further proof comes from the names of cities which
paid allegiance. By the seventh year Shulgi-admu was
recognized in one Elamite city, while in Susa itself Beliarik replaced Zariqum a year or two later. Gimil-Sin wisely ordered the restoration of the temple to Ninhursag on the Susian acropolis, and his own bricks
commemorated its rebuilding.
The uplands to the north of Elam in territory for
which Shulgi had so valiantly fought were likewise
obedient to the new lord of Ur. Gudea, again without reference to his master,
describes his operations in Kimash, where he quarried
copper., while Madga to the south of Kimash furnished him gypsum. His numerous references to the
use of lapis lazuli arouse our interest, for this highly prized stone, in
antiquity as today, must be sought in eastern Iran, and in Gudea’s time
commercial relationships with the plateau could not have been interrupted.
Perhaps because he was definitely afraid of the
breakup of his empire, Gimil-Sin consolidated the
rule over the more doubtful and troublesome regions in the hands of a single
personage. This individual was Warad-Nannar, whose
many titles make dry reading but are nevertheless highly significant. He was
merely the ishakku or prince of some
districts; these were Lagash (surely after Gudea’s disappearance), Zabum, the land Gutebum, the
“City of the Divine Gimil-Sin,” Hamazi,
and Ganhar. Over others he was shakkanakku or governor; these included Uzargar-shana, Bashime, Timat-Enlil, Urbillum, Ishar, the Subartu
peoples, and the land Karda.
One region neither Gimil-Sin
nor his subordinate could conquer. Elam and Anshan might be made subject, but
an independent state continued to flourish in Simash concurrently with the dynasty of Ur. In this land Girnamme and Tazitta I had been followed by the kings Ebarti and Tazitta II. Enbi-luhhan, the succeeding ruler, was a contemporary of
Ur’s next and last sovereign, Ibi-Sin.
The accession (in 2207) of this unfortunate appears to
have taken place under peaceful circumstances, though no one then alive can
have believed that Ur was still all-powerful. For a time the pretext of its
former might was maintained, and a “devastation” of Shimurrum gave its name to a year. Likewise a mention of the ishakku of Awak, Sharrum-bani, in
the business documents of the second year and, moreover, the occurrence of
business documents at Susa dated in his second and third years indicate that
Elam for a time remained loyal. But then came revolt and invasion; and it was
the misfortune of Ur that its ruler weakened at the very moment when two young
and vigorous states, Mari and Simash, were attacking,
one from each side.
From Simash Enbiluhhan moved down into the Elamite lowlands and entered
Susa. Like a true sovereign Ibi-Sin promptly met and
worsted the invader; after his victory he boasted that like a storm he had
overwhelmed in one day the land Awan and the cities Adamdun and Susa and had captured Enbiluhhan or, as he knew
him, Enbilua. But Simash was not to be denied. Her next ruler, Kindattu, again
occupied Susa; and his control was absolute. With tactful strategy his first
move was the propitiation of the local deity, and later scribes tell us that he
piously restored the temple of Inshushinak. Meanwhile
he had been winning to his side other lands formerly under the control of Ur.
Thus Huhunuri rebelled from Ibi-Sin,
who claims its subjection. He calls it “the key to the land Elam”, but a
variant text reads “the key to the land Anshan”; and doubtless Kindattu of Simash, who now ruled
Anshan and Elam, made him pay dearly for his victory.
The Third Dynasty of Ur was now clearly on the
defensive; and Ishbi-Irra, the man of Mari, swept
down from the northwest upon Nippur and advanced against Kazallu,
whose ishakku fearfully implored aid from his
suzerain. Indignantly Ibi-Sin replied that no one
need be in terror; as sovereign he would be aided by Enlil and by the Elamites,
who were now marching toward Ur; his victory over Ishbi-Irra was therefore assured. This was a blind faith, and in foreign captivity he had
occasion to rue his words. The people of Elam, or rather of Anshan and Simash, came to Babylonia, not to help but to plunder; and
to Anshan they carried off the last ruler of Ur, IbiSin,
together with his god Nannar (2185 B.C.)
We do not know what spoil Kindattu reaped from his conquest. He can have won little save movable property, for he
obtained no land in the alluvium; and his name was so quickly lost to posterity
that the honor of the conquest was denied him and his destruction of Ur
ascribed to another. His own dynasty continued in Elam and in Simash, but these were far removed both culturally and
physically from Babylonia; consequently it found little mention in the tangled
web of affairs within the Land of the Two Rivers.
With Ibi-Sin’s death the
tiny city-states of Babylonia won back that local independence they had enjoyed
before Ur gave unity to the land. A little kingdom again came into being at Hurshitum, the modern Tuz Khurmatli. There its king, Puhia,
son of Asirum, erected his own palace with bricks
inscribed in Akkadian. In Ganhar Masiam-Ishtar
dedicated a cylinder seal to his king, Kisari. In
Der, a ruler whose name is lost commemorated by a Sumerian inscription the
building of a temple and the restoration of the city Der which he loved. Far
more important than these, however, were the two kingdoms of Isin and Larsa. The one was founded by Ishbi-Irra,
the man of Mari, the other by Naplanum.
Gimil-ilishu, successor to the founder of the Isin dynasty, ruled in Ur also; he
tells us that he brought back Nannar, the god of Ur,
from Anshan. Whether this was accomplished by force of arms or by diplomacy he
does not say, but we surmise the latter. For Kindattu,
as king of Simash, had now yielded to Idaddu whom we know from his own inscriptions as Idadu-Inshushinak, a man of some moment. He himself claimed
to be a son of Bebi, an individual otherwise unknown;
but the twelfth century scribes of Shilhak-Inshushinak,
who included an Idaddu in their lists of the earlier
kings, knew him as the “descendant” of Hutran-tepti,
and it is possibly one of his year formulas which reads “year when the bronze
statue of Hutran-tepti was made.”
In Idaddu’s case we have the
first example of a practice frequently to be detected in the later Elamite
changes of rule, a gradual advancement from a relatively insignificant position
to one of great importance, often to royalty itself. The titles of the offices held
during this period were those which had been borne by the most important
figures in Elam during the period of the Third Ur Dynasty; although they
originated in Babylonia, their use in Elam did not in the least imply
subservience to the lowlands.
Idadu-Inshushinak very probably began his career as ishakku of Susa; he then became both ishakku of Susa
and shakkanakku of the land Elam. In this
office, by an Akkadian inscription, he tells of fortifying Susa and surrounding
it with a rampart, of beautifying Kizra, Hubbu, and other parts of Susa, of erecting the walls of
the temple on the Susian acropolis, and of depositing therein a limestone water
basin to the honor of Inshushinak. The curse which he
invokes on those who may dare to damage his monuments appeals to Inshushinak and Shamash, Inanna (or Ishtar) and Sin.
Doubtless this was inscribed while Kindattu was still
the reigning monarch. Then Idadu-Inshushinak, as Idaddu I, became king of Simash or, as his son called him, king of Simash and Elam.
We may well hesitate to admit the defeat of a man of this caliber at the hands
of Gimil-ilishu of Isin.
Idaddu’s son, Tan-Ruhuratir, likewise began his career
as ishakku of Susa. Promptly he entered into
the life and intrigues of Babylonia by marrying Mekubi,
daughter of Bilalama, ishakku of Eshnunna. For safety in her new home Mekubi erected a temple to Inanna, the goddess of the
Susian acropolis. Eventually Tan-Ruhuratir became the
eighth king of Simash (ca. 2145-2125); but
bricks of Shilhak-Inshushinak, a thousand years
later, attest his continued interest in the temple of Inshushinak at Susa.
The ninth king of Simash was
a second Ebarti (2125-2115), who may likewise have
advanced to the sovereignty through many intermediate offices. On the Susa
tablets, however, we have only the year formula which he decreed at the time he
reached the highest office in the land, “year after Ebarti became king” Idaddu II (ca. 2115-2083), son of Tan-Ruhuratir, was more fortunate. He, too, began
public life as ishakku of Susa, and while
serving in this capacity he strove persistently to obtain the local deity’s approval.
His own bricks commemorate the construction of the wall of Uruanna,
the Susian acropolis; and other bricks inscribed with duplicate Akkadian and
Sumerian texts tell how he renovated the old walls of the temple with new
bricks to the honor of Inshushinak. His scribe Ishmenni and his servant Pududu dedicated to him, as ishakku of Susa, their
personal seals; but like kings of the Third Ur Dynasty he intrusted to his judge, Kuk-Shimut, his own royal seal.
Eventually he, too, was recognized as the ruler of Simash,
becoming the tenth king of that dynasty; and like his predecessor he also
employed date formulas. One year is dated by the destruction of Zidanu; another tells of the devastation of Shindi- libbu; a third mentions
the erection of a temple to Inanna of Uruanna. Taken
all in all, he was a monarch of much power and of many conquests.
Meanwhile a mighty ruler had come to the throne of one
of the numerous kingdoms within Babylonia. For a hundred years after the fall
of Ur the predominant state in this region was the kingdom of Isin. Throughout
this period the kings of Larsa enjoyed at best a
local independence, possibly at times admitting vassalage to Isin. The fifth
ruler of Larsa, Gungunum,
was too strong an individual to tolerate this condition of affairs; immediately
after his accession (2087) he turned to the northeast for conquest. There Der
was still independent under its own king, now Anumutabil,
who had himself already begun to expand by sending an ambassador into Eshnunna and bringing to an end the dynasty of Kirikiri and Bilalama. Gungunum quickly reduced Anumutabil to the status of a shakkanakku, added the
troops of Der to those he had brought from Larsa, and
penetrated the eastern mountains in his third year to destroy the city Bashimu. This was a direct thrust at Idaddu II and the kingdom of Simash.
We are ignorant of the causes which led to this war.
Possibly Idaddu himself had once invaded Babylonia,
and Gungunum was merely undertaking reprisal.
Whatever the case, at the very time when the kingdom of Simash was seemingly at the peak of its power, this war brought disaster to Elam. Gungunum’s fifth year is dated by a conquest of Anshan; the
Akkadian inscription of Anumutabil of Der, his
subordinate, tells how this shakkanakku smote
the heads of the peoples of Anshan, Elam, and Simash,
and how he destroyed Barahshi. Idaddu himself, the king of Simash, suddenly disappears.
All this happened so rapidly that in later times the
very scribes of Elam were at a loss. Glibly they gave the names of two kings
presumed to follow Idaddu II on the throne, namely, Idaddu-napir (“Idaddu is god”)
and Idaddu-temti (“Idaddu is lord”). On this point, however, historical method demands a more critical
attitude. On their very face these names are spurious, coined according to the
widespread theory, prevalent even in Elam, that the ruler himself was a deity.
Further, as though to disprove the same Elamite scribes in their patriotic but
distorted attempt to continue the dynasty, a tablet found at Susa bears the
year formula of Gungunum’s sixteenth year. Obviously,
no other explanation is possible than that Gungunum of Larsa defeated and killed Idaddu in battle and incorporated within his own growing empire the plain in which lay
the city Susa. Thus quickly the Elamite kingdom collapsed, the Simash dynasty ceased, and foreign control over a part of
Elam resulted.
CHAPTER III . DIVINE MESSENGERS OF ELAM, SIMASH, AND
SUSA
IN OUR attempt to reconstruct the historical data
concerning early Iran and Elam we were introduced to the land by an event told
about a remote king of a Babylonian city, and we have seen that in these early
times a power mightier than any in Sumer seems to have ruled the Elamite
highlands. We have followed the rise of a dynasty of A wan contemporary with
the kings of Agade and have traced the collapse of both before the invading
hordes of Gutium. We have observed that a dynasty at Ur in Babylonia, rising
after the bleak years of Guti rule, was paralleled by
a dynasty in Elamite Simash, by which it was
eventually overthrown. Finally, we have discovered that the last ruler of Simash was himself the captive of a Babylonian sovereign
and that Elam once more bowed to a warring invader. We are now to see a proud
Elamite in possession of Babylonian territory, even while his own Elam was
saturated through and through with Babylonian culture.
A mighty struggle began in Babylonia about the middle
of the twenty-first millennium. New peoples, filtering in from Syrian Amurru, had already brought a disposition to quarrel with
any and all comers; and when three new monarchs in one year rose to power, each
determined to rule supreme, trouble might well be anticipated. In 2050 B.C. Gungunum’s successor gave place to Sumu-ilum in Larsa, Bur-Sin II came to the throne in Isin, and
the First Dynasty of Babylon began under Sumu-abum.
Early in his fourth year Sumu-ilum combated the
Amorite tribes settled in Akuz and Kazallu; in his eighth he attempted to subjugate Ka-ida, the “Mouth of the Rivers.” Success was apparently
denied him, or at least he failed to retain his conquests, for Sumu-abum was compelled to attack Kazallu only five years later. From events such as these we may safely conclude that
the land was in turmoil and confusion.
The exploits of one individual form a brief interlude
in these years, for Ilu-shuma of Ashur may have invaded
Babylonia in the time of Sumu-abum. His own inscription
claims that he brought freedom to Ur and Nippur, which were nominally at least
under the control of Larsa; if the granting of
freedom be taken to mean freedom from taxes, the inscription must be understood
definitely to imply invasion. He entered the lands east of the Tigris also, for
he asserts that he freed Awal, Kismar, and Der of the
god Sataran; the warrior must almost have reached
Elamite territory. Nevertheless, the claim of this ruler stands as an isolated
statement; there are no other historical data to deny or to confirm it.
Whatever may have been Ilu-shuma’s achievement, it
had no enduring result.
The history of Babylonia during the next few years is
marked by the attempts of two rulers to combat, regain, or control Kazallu east of the Tigris where Amorites had entered.
Sumu-ilum of Larsa smote
the district in his twenty-second year (2028 B.C.). A decade later the
Babylonian Sumu-la-ilum began an eight-year contest
with the Amorite Iahzer-ili, whom he drove from the
city. We may suspect that the fugitive did not remain away permanently, for two
years later the walls of Kazallu had to be destroyed,
and Iahzer-ili was not declared officially dead until
five years after this date.
Such disturbances within Babylonia once more gave
complete freedom to Elam. There a new dynasty came into power, a dynasty which
lasted as long as the far-famed First Dynasty of Babylon and which was almost
equally important.
The first king of this line, Ebarti (ca. 2020-2001), is given no genealogy in the lists of Shilhak-Inshu-shinak. That he was not in a position of
great importance before his accession is suggested by a seal of his servant Gimil-Bau which marks him as a private individual; then a
seal of the servant of his son Kuk-tanra designates
him as king and his full title, “King of Anzan and
Susa” appears. He seems to be mentioned in a Babylonian omen text, and the
reason is not far to seek: he was the father of Shilhaha,
better known as Shimti-Shilhak, who is widely
heralded as the father of Kudur-Mabuk.
The exploits of Shilhaha (ca. 2000-1986), or rather of Shimti-Shilhak, are
unknown to us, although they must have been noteworthy. Generation after generation
traced back to him its ancestry, and his building activities on the temples of Nannar and Inshushinak in Susa
were long remembered. He it was who made the suzerain of greater Elam the
lordly superior of the petty kings in local districts. Henceforth the highest
title in the land—and Shilhaha himself received it—was sukkalmah, “exalted messenger.” Since this
title was of more importance than “king,” it must refer to the ruler’s
relationship to the gods, and we might therefore translate it by “divine
messenger” or even “angel”! Shilhaha also instituted
the use of another title, adda, “father”; doubtless this refers to the
sovereign’s relationship to his subjects. Its use has puzzled many a historian
of Babylonia through its adoption by Shilhaha’s own
son, Kudur-Mabuk. A third title, “king,” would have
marked a man as mighty in Babylonia; this signified little in Edam, where Shilhaha was only incidentally “King of Anzan and Susa.”
Along with the additional epithets adda and
“king” hereafter employed by the supreme ruler, the latter might equally
treasure the titles “sukkal of Elam and Simash” and “sukkal of
Susa,” for he himself had once held these offices. As such they were, however, strictly
subordinate to the title sukkalmah, as the
word sukkal, “minister,” “plenipotentiary,”
shows; and, since Susa was an Akkadianized city, its sukkal was the least important of the realm.
Nevertheless, even he might expect greater power, for Shilhaha restored the step-by-step policy of throne succession already noted in earlier
periods. Upon the death of the sukkalmah it
appears that the sukkal of Elam and Simash himself became sukkalmah;
the sukkal of Susa, who was often locally
known as the king of Susa, advanced to the office of sukkal of Elam and Simash. A new sukkal of Susa was thereupon chosen, probably by the sukkalmah,
for it would seem that the new subordinate was almost invariably a member of
the supreme ruler’s own family. At any rate, the fortunate individual may often
have been a minor, for by such a choice the sukkalmah would retain the imperial power with less risk to his own life.
Our information about the period is secured largely
from business documents of Susa. A few other texts, written perhaps during the
early reigns, have been found in a place known today as Malamir,
a hundred miles to the southeast. These, though important from the economic
standpoint, add little to our knowledge of the political situation throughout
the ensuing centuries. The tablets from both sites are written in dialectic
Akkadian strongly impregnated with Elamite elements. During the early part of
the period the personal names are for the most part Elamite. As time passes,
the names tend more and more to become purely Akkadian, although the names of
the months and titles of professions often remain in the native tongue.
Some of the Susian texts from the first part of the
period are temple documents, receipts for sheep and oxen destined for the
palace of the sukkal and for sacrifices to the
deities. The latter contributions usually go to Inshushinak or to Inanna, the lady of the acropolis, to whom sacrifices were sometimes
offered in the palace of the sukkal. Other
recipients of such gifts are Shimut, Nahhunte, Nergal, Enki or Ea, and
Nin-egal, the lady of the palace. Place names in these documents include Zabzalu, better known as Zabsha- lu, from which a messenger came to Susa, and Simash, Ashgupe, Gurumutak, Lahrin (perhaps the
later Lahiru), Zaban, and Dur Shulgi.
The majority of the later texts are simple memoranda
of rents and mortgages, sales and exchanges, wills and documents of
administration, and adoption records. They are not unlike those of the same period
which have been discovered in Babylonia; nevertheless, the language, as has
already been remarked, is greatly influenced by the Elamite currently spoken,
and some features show customs at variance with those practiced in the
lowlands.
More important from the standpoint of international and
local history are the data these texts furnish us for a study of the chronology
of the period. In Elam, as in all other ancient lands, the curse was an
effective weapon. No less powerful was the invocation of a mighty deity; and,
since the ruler was the god’s representative upon earth, the practice of
swearing to the truth of a statement by the name of the local chief or the
supreme sovereign was in high favor. Consequently the gods Inshushinak and Ishmekarab were often called upon by the
contracting parties at Susa; at Malamir the goddess Shalla, the Hurrian Shala, alone or with her suzerain, Inshushinak, was frequently invoked. Fortunately for the
historian, in place of the deity the name of a more earthly ruler is sometimes
mentioned; thus in the Susian texts the sukkal of the city is often named, together with one of his more potent overlords, the sukkal of Elam and Simash or the sukkalmah. This type of invocation in
the documents has shed so much light on the internal political situation of
Elam throughout this period that the lists of the land’s rulers compiled by
Elam’s own Shilhak-Inshushinak can often be proved
inadequate and in one or two instances can actually be corrected.
Thus today we may discover a fact which was apparently
unknown to the twelfth-century antiquarian, namely, that at the time Shilhaha or Shimti-Shil-hak was
the sukkalmah of Elam his subordinates were Shirukduh as the sukkal of
Elam and Simash and Shimut-wartash as the sukkal of Susa. The lists tell us that
the former was a “descendant” of Shilhaha; we would
expect as much, for Shilhaha seems to have revived
this scheme of succession and would naturally place a relative upon the minor
throne. Shimut-wartash, though ruler of Susa, left
his own inscription on the island Liyan, where he
dedicated to the goddess Kiririsha a votive cylinder.
In Babylonia it was not Shilhaha but his son Kudur-Mabuk who became famous. This
Elamite, entering the lowlands about 1995 B.C., made himself at home in Emutbal, the district around Larsa,
and threatened the independence of this sovereign city. His own inscription
actually proclaimed him the “father” of Emutbal. This
was a title borrowed from Elam; it was of more honor than “king,” yet of less
prestige than sukkalmah. As we have seen, it
had been employed by his own father, Shilhaha, but as
used by the son it designated his subservience to the supreme ruler of all
Elam, the sukkalmah.
Sin-iqisham was just
beginning his reign at Larsa and could ill afford
such a challenge to his power. He began the offensive the following year by an
attack on Ka-ida and Nazarum.
In retaliation Kudur-Mabuk sought alliance with Isin,
where Zambia came to the throne in Sin-iqisham’s fifth year. In that year the latter claimed the defeat of Elam and Zambia; we
may doubt the veracity of the claimant, for before the year was out he was
supplanted by Silli-Adad, and the new king at his
accession appears humble indeed. He calls himself the nourisher of Nippur, the ishakku of Ur, Larsa, Lagash,
and Kutalla; but these are scarcely royal epithets,
and it is quite possible that Silli-Adad was vassal
to the Elamite. When he dared call himself “king” in the date formulas, he was
at once deposed and Warad-Sin, Kudur-Mabuk’s own son, was placed on the throne (1989 B.C.).
For a few years the son was nominal ruler, and the
date formulas are in his name; the father was, however, in actual control. The
second year is dated by an invasion of Kazallu and
its neighboring district Mutiabal. Zabum of Babylon reports a conquest of Kazallu in the same year. This is significant, for it may mean that Zabum was allied with the Elamite to meet a common danger, or that he was actually a
vassal of the foreigner. The latter is probably the more accurate picture, for Kudur-Mabuk himself relates how he massacred the armies of Kazallu and Mutiabal in Larsa and Emutbal and how he
guaranteed the existence of battle-scarred Kazallu,
although he destroyed its wails. Again in this inscription the Elamite declares
himself the adda of his subjects; this time he is adda of Amurru, meaning doubtless the Amorite peoples whom he had
just conquered in Kazallu and Mutiabal.
For five years of Warad-Sin’s
reign in Larsa the royal inscriptions are all from
the hand of Kudur-Mabuk. Finally Warad-Sin
is alone when he dedicates a sanctuary to Inanna of Hallab for his own life and
for the life of his father. Why Kudur-Mabuk should
disappear so suddenly is a puzzle that needs unraveling. Possibly he was
recalled to Elam by the death of his father, Shilhaha,
although the automatic succession of Shirukduh to the
office of sukkalmah and Shimut-wartash to the position of sukkal of Elam and Simash hardly required his presence. Perhaps he was needed
in Elam to assist in the naming of the new sukkal of Susa, Siwepalarhuppak, although the right to
designate the Susa subordinate probably belonged solely to the new sukkalmah. At any rate, throughout the remainder of Warad-Sin’s twelve-year reign in Larsa the son was left in full charge, and Kudur- Mabuk reappears only with the accession of his second son,
Rim-Sin, in this city. Again he is titled adda of Emutbal;
and he is even more closely associated with Rim-Sin than he had been with Warad-Sin, for father and son now make joint dedications
for their own lives. Then Kudur-Mabuk again disappears;
and Rim-Sin, whose reign of sixty-one years shows that he must have been a mere
child at his accession, makes the dedications alone.
There is no information concerning the reign of Shirukduh (ca. 1985-1966), although it would seem
that his subordinate ruler of Simash and Elam, Shimut-wartash, died in office and that Siwepalarhuppak advanced to this position while Kuduzulush I became
the new sukkal of Susa. Then with the death of Shirukduh the accession appears to have moved forward
quite regularly; Siwepalarhuppak became sukkalmah (ca. 1965-1946), with Kuduzulush as his sukkal of Elam and Simash,
and Kutir-Nahhunte as the newly chosen sukkal of Susa. The new sukkalmah himself left no extant inscriptions, but centuries later he was named as the
first of Susa’s rulers to bring a certain precious wood to Ulpuhshi-igi-balap,
where subsequent sovereigns could transport it to the capital; and the scribes
of Shilhak-Inshushinak knew that he had restored Inshushinak’s temple on the acropolis.
Meanwhile in Babylonia Elam’s descendant Rim-Sin
appeared to be making remarkable headway. In his fifteenth year he became
embroiled with the peoples of Uruk, Isin, Babylon, Rapiqum,
and Sutium and claims to have come out the victor. Fifteen
years Later (1947) his conquest of Isin was a genuine triumph, and he seemed to
be well on the way to the control of the lowlands. He reckoned without Hammurabi,
who came to Babylon’s throne in that very year. This intrepid lawgiver began
almost immediately a policy of expansion; he attacked Malgium in his fourth and tenth years, plundered Rim-Sin’s recent conquest, Isin, in
his seventh, and entered Emut-bai or Larsa’s own territory in his eighth. By 1918 Rim-Sin was
hard-pressed; quite naturally he appealed to his ancestral Elam, where perhaps Kuduzulush I was now the sukkalmah (ca. 1945-1918). Most unwisely the Elamites answered the appeal. Using Marhashi or Barahshi as their
base, they attacked Subartum, Gutium, Eshnunna, and Malgium. Their defeat
by the army of Hammurabi meant not only Rim-Sin’s loss of his kingdom in the
following year, when the ruler of Babylon swept through Larsa;
it meant not only Elam’s loss of prestige in foreign countries; the attempted
succor brought about the collapse of the empire in Elam and the overthrow of
the regime. Although no foreigner invaded the land, the defeat in Babylonia was
apparently so severe that Elam fell a prey to its own internal conflicts. At any
rate, we know little of its history for almost seventy years.
One ruler only emerges with a certain degree of
clarity. This is Addahushu, who declared himself a
son of a sister of Shilhaha and whose reign, if reign
it was, appears to have been recognized in Susa only. He was, in fact, denied
an official title in most of his inscriptions, merely claiming to be the
shepherd of the people of Susa or of Inshushinak. His
deeds inluded the erection of a temple for the god Narute and a bridge for Inshushinak.
Further, a district was named for him, and a tablet with a seal impression of a
servant of his points to the use of date formulas, for it bears the date “year
of Shumu-abi.” He, too, finally attained the coveted
position of sukkal of Susa, and in this office
dedicated anew the temple of Nannar in commemoration
of the first two rulers of the dynasty: Ebarti, the
King of Anzan and Susa; and Shilhaha,
the sukkalmah, the adda, the King of Anzan and Susa.
We are ignorant of the events which permitted
reorganization of a stable kingdom. Perhaps around 1850 the same Kutir-Nahhunte who as a mere child had been sukkal of Susa more than sixty years before revived
the type of government which had been popular in the days of his fathers. As
his subordinates he chose Tata, whose full name was Atta-merra-halki, to be sukkal of
Elam and Simash, and Temti-agun to be sukkal of Susa. The latter, calling
himself a son of a sister of Shirukduh, wrote an
inscription in Akkadian; that royal documents should be written in a foreign
language shows how great had been the penetration of Semitic influences at Susa
in the years immediately preceding. The text dedicates a temple to Ishmekarab, the deity so frequently invoked in the business
records, for the life of the sukkalmah Kutir-Nahhunte and for the lives of the members of his own
family. Also in Akkadian, and likewise for the life of Kutir-Nahhunte, Temti-agun dedicated a temple and several statues to Inshushinak by a text which has been fully preserved only
in a copy made seven hundred years later by Shilhak-Inshushinak,
who added in Elamite his own interpretation of its meaning.
Temti-agun in time became sukkal of Elam and Simash, perhaps through the premature death of Tata, with Kutir-Shilhaha as the new appointee in Susa. Then Temti-agun became the supreme ruler (ca. 1840-1826),
with Kutir-Shilhaha and Kuk-Nashur I in the lesser positions. The latter was a son of a sister of Temti-agun, or so he claimed to be, when, as sukkal of Susa, he granted land to a favorite of his court.
When time raised Kutir-Shilhaha to the office of sukkalmah (ca. 1825-1811), Kuk-Nashur,
himself now sukkal of Elam and Simash, again conferred land upon his favorite. He was no
longer under the necessity of honoring his dead relative, and in this document
Kuk-Nashur traces his ancestry back beyond Temti-agun and beyond Temti-agun’s aliened “ancestor” Shirukduh to Shirukduh’s “ancestor” Shilhaha or Shimti-Shilhak;
thus he too became another of the “sons of a sister of Shilhaha”
so well known to the compilers of later lists.
For a time the new sukkal of Susa under Kutir-Shilhaha appears to have been Shirtuh. He claimed to have been a son of a sister of Kuk-Nashur, his immediate superior, when, like his alleged
relative, he granted land to one of his own courtiers. Perhaps he presumed too
much upon his masters, for he soon disappeared and Temti-raptash became the sukkal or king of Susa.
Finally Kuk-Nashur became sukkalmah (1810— 1800). Although Temti-raptash and a second Kudu-zulush were his nominal underlings,
he himself proudly enumerated all the
titles he had won in the course of his career. As the sukkalmah, sukkal of Elam, Simash,
and Susa, he continued to bestow crown lands upon his favorites; to Shukshu and Mahi-si of the city Humman he granted land extending from Hutekuk to Huteshekin, from Asirsir to Hitpuli, and from Manhashhur to Shumahani. This document is important not only for
its text and accompanying map; perhaps because the land given was situated near
Babylonia, the charter received the current Babylonian year date, the first
year of Ammiz-aduga, which shows that the document
was composed in 1801 B.C.. To the god of Susa Kuk-Nashur was no less kind. One inscription reports the dedication of his sanctuary;
another, which describes the erection of a temple inclosure,
like the text of Temti-agun was recopied by scribes
of the twelfth century and so was preserved for posterity. Kuk-Nashur was evidently a powerful monarch; it was the irony
of fate that the same scribes who so faithfully copied his text after many
centuries confused him with a second Kuk-Nashur, a
“descendant” of Tan-Uli.
The succeeding reign of Temti-raptash (ca. 1799- 1791), who may have controlled Kuduzulush II and Tan-Uli as subordinates, would seem to have
been uneventful, although the large number of economic documents which belong
to his time may indicate an increased amount of business activity in Susa. Likewise
there is no additional information concerning the years of Kuduzulush II (ca. 1790-1781), although it is certain that he too became sukkalmah. His subordinates would seem to have been
Tan-Uli and Temti-halki. As sukkal of Susa the latter individual, by an
Akkadian inscription in which he employs merely the title “king,” dedicated a
temple to “Inshushinak, the king of the gods,” an
epithet wrongly interpreted in our own day to obtain the name of a sovereign, “Inshushinak-shar-ilani.” When
Tan-Uli became sukkalmah (ca. 1780-1771) Temti-halki was elevated to the
office of sukkal of Elam and Simash according to the usual scheme, and Kuk-Nashur II became the new ruler in Susa. Owing to an error
of the Elamite antiquarians, this Kuk-Nashur was
confused with the first of the name, and in memory of his supposed deeds
several bricks were inscribed in the twelfth century B.C. Today we may correct
the mistake and distinguish the individuals without too great condemnation of
the later scribes.
Unfortunately, we have no data on Tan-Uli; but when Temti-halki in turn
became sukkalmah, he, like others before him,
rejoiced in the full titulary when he dedicated a temple to the chief deity of
Susa. Again writing in Akkadian, he tells us that, like Kuk-Nashur I, he was a “son of a sister of Shilhaha.” Though
eventually his titulary was forgotten, his deed was commemorated six hundred
years later by Shilhak-Inshushinak.
Incomplete and confused sources deprive us of the
names of Temti-halki’s successors. Were our materials
complete, we might still find many gaps, for Elam’s involved scheme of
succession surely invited assassination. One other “son of a sister of Shilhaha” came into prominence, possibly before, but more
probably after, Temti-halki. This was Kuk-Kirwash. We first meet him as a minor official, perhaps sukkal of Susa, under Bala-ishshan,
of whom it was later said that he, like Siwepalarhuppak,
brought precious woods to the Susa temple. Kuk-Kirwash in turn, probably as sukkal of Elam and Simash, had as his subordinate Tem-Sanit,
whose early death seems to have brought Kuk-Nahhunte to the Susian office. Finally he reached the summit of his political ambitions
and became sukkalmah, having Kuk-Nahhunte and a third Kuk-Nashur as subordinates. In the now antiquated Sumerian he tells how he restored a
temple in Susa and surrounded it with a new wall. Had we other original texts
of this “descendant” of Shilhaha, perhaps we could
discover his correct ancestry; unfortunately, the twelfth-century scribes who
copied his record and added their own Elamite comments60 knew him only as a son
of Lankuku, a name otherwise unfamiliar; hence his
exact position in the line of succession remains doubtful.
History often shows that the rulers and peoples of a
weakening kingdom make every effort to recapture the glorious days of the past.
Deliberate archaization is one of the methods used in attempting to restore that
past; perhaps, therefore, we may see both weakness and archaization in the
numerous claims to descent from the great Shilhaha.
At any rate, about 1750 B.C. Elam fades almost entirely from our view. Inasmuch
as Babylonia about this time falls under the shadow of the Kassites, we must
turn to these and to Babylonia’s history for light. There we shall try to
discover whether Elam’s fate is not reflected in the catastrophe which befell
its neighbor on the west, the Land of the Two Rivers.
CHAPTER IV . THE KASSITE INTERLUDE
IT HAS been rightly stated that few conquerors left so
great an impress of their power upon Babylonian peoples as did the Kassites,
though we know little of their earlier history. Fortunately, some idea of their
linguistic connections may be gained from a list of Kassite words compiled by
Babylonian scribes, who gave also their corresponding Akkadian translations.
Most of the preserved words, as well as the majority of the personal names,
demonstrate that the common people among the Kassites spoke a Caucasian
language which was perhaps a near neighbor of Elamite. Another list, which
turns the names of Kassite rulers into Akkadian, adds further light on the
question of their deities embodied in the names. The fact that more than one
deity has been identified with a given Babylonian god points to the syncretism
of several groups of gods before the invaders entered Babylonia. We are, however,
able to discern that some of the Kassite gods are of Caucasian type. Such are Shipak, equated with Marduk; Sah, identified with Shamash; Hudha, likened to Adad; and Harbe,
corresponding to Enlil. Others of their gods are of uncertain origin. Among
these are Kashshu, their eponymous deity, who
doubtless took his name from their land and may also be Caucasian; Kamulla or Ea; Dur and Shugab, equated with Nergal; Shuqamuna,
likened to Nergal and Nusku; Hala or Gula; Shumalia or Shibarru,
“the Lady of the Bright Mountains, who dwells on the summits”; Mirizir or Beltu; and Gidar or Ninurta.
We may detect among the invaders another element also.
The horse was a divine symbol to the Kassites; and their constant use of this
animal, which became common in Babylonia only after their entry, connects the
intruders with the Indo-European hordes who were at this time attacking the
whole northern boundary of the Fertile Crescent, namely, the Hittites, the
rulers of Mitanni, and perhaps an element among the Hyksos. This connection is
further substantiated by the names of other Kassite deities. Shuriash, equated with the sun-god Shamash, is indubitably
the Hindu Surya and the Greek Helios. Maruttash,
likened to Ninurta, has been identified with the Indian Marut. Buriash, another stormgod like Adad, appears to be identical with the Greek Boreas.
All these factors show that the Kassites were a conglomerate
people, and we live too long after them to disentangle completely the various
elements of their composition. Nevertheless, it seems clear that an Indo-European,
and so ultimately Nordic, ruling caste had once lived among them and dominated
a group of alien and largely Caucasian peoples. Normally, such conquerors force
their language upon the subject peoples, but we have one example of the reverse
in Mitanni, and the same situation may have developed among the peoples who
came into history as the Kassites; their Nordic aristocracy may in time have
forgotten its own language save as it was preserved in a few proper names. The
native races had their revenge.
Like their ancestry, the site of the Kassites’ homeland
is doubtful. Later remnants would indicate that they descended upon Babylonia
from the central Zagros, north of Elam. The great-grandson of their third king
claimed suzerainty over the Guti and over Padan and Alman, which should be the Holwan region. Shalmaneser III of Assyria, almost a thousand years after their entry,
found in Namri, a territory of the Lullubi, a ruler Ianzu, whose
name is merely the Kassite word for "king.” In the hill country to the
east and northeast of Babylonia the name of the Kassites lingered on into
classical times among the Kissean and Kossean tribes. However, it is necessary to point out that
this evidence is largely negative, for there was a land Kashshen to the north of Elam already in the twenty-fourth century B.C., at a time when
it is highly improbable that the true Kassites had yet arrived. This implies
that they took their name from a country long before occupied, and one which
may have retained its original designation long after new and newer peoples
became assimilated. Perhaps it witnessed the amalgamation of the various
elements—Indo-European, Caucasian, and other—which composed the historical
Kassites; perhaps that syncretism had already taken place in another and more
distant land.
Too often we speak of invasion and attack, or the
rapid entrance or intrusion of newcomers into a land already populated. This
seldom happens. New peoples do appear on the horizon, and these may make one
attempt, however feeble, to descend en masse into a coveted land. If repulsed, they begin a policy of peaceful
penetration, during which they are gradually assimilated into the old stock,
though losing little of their virility. Step by step their members advance in
power, until they themselves, once despised and feared, are in control and rule
the land.
Thus occurred the “conquest” of the Kassites in
Babylonia. As early as 1896 B.C. Samsu-iluna of Babylon
repelled a wholesale invasion of the lowlands by their hungry hordes.
Thereafter for almost one-hundred and fifty years they appear in the Babylonian
business documents as harvesters, laborers, and hostlers. The intervening steps
in their rise to full power are lost, but we must assume that their advance was
gradual and constant. With minds untutored save in borrowed ways, they finally
reached the pinnacle of power, and Babylonia fell under the sway of the Kassite
dynasty in 1749 B.C.
The first of their kings was Gandash (1749-1734), who ruled sixteen years and in a half-literate inscription called
himself “king of the Four World-Regions, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of
Babylon.” Obviously, he was attempting to declare himself the legitimate
successor of the dynasty which had just ceased. The twenty-two-year reigns of
his immediate successors, a son Agum and Kashtiliash I, who may not have been descended from Agum, point to a stable kingdom and to undisturbed power,
although the almost total cessation of business documents indicates commercial
inactivity and possibly stagnation. Ushshi, son of Kashtiliash, ruled eight years; then came Abirattash and his son Tazzigurumash.
A surprising fact is related of a monarch contemporary with the last rulers.
This sovereign, Gulkishar of the independent Sealands territory (1684-1630), gave land on the bank of
the Tigris in the region of Der to one of his subjects. If Der northeast of
Babylonia proper was in his control, the Kassites may at this time have been
cut off from the route to their last homeland in the mountains.
Harba-Shipak and Tiptakzi followed Tazzigurumash,
whose line was restored with the accession of a son, Agum-kakrime.
He it was who proclaimed himself king of Padan and
Alman, king of Gutium, in addition to the more regular titles king of Kashshu, king of Akkad, and king of the broad land of Babylon.
This may indicate that he felt obligated to protect his ancestral home in the
mountains as well as the newly occupied regions in the plains.
Agum-kakrime was followed by Burna-Buriash, and he by an
unknown and then by Kashtiliash II (1530-1512). The
latter gradually closed in on the Sealands; and his
brother marched against Eagamil, the last king of the Sealands, who took refuge in Elam. Then the brother
himself, Ulam-Buriash, came to the Kassite throne,
and with his accession (1511) the dynasty seems to have become thoroughly
acclimated to its new home in Babylonia. The subsequent so-called “Amarna”
period does not here interest us.
Inscriptions of the Kassite rulers so far mentioned,
though nowhere numerous, are totally lacking at Susa, and the excavators at
that site appear to have run into a barren stratum for the period. Kassite
occupation of Elam contemporaneous with Kassite sovereignty of Babylonia thus
seems out of the question. On the other hand, it is certain that the Elamite dynasty
founded by Ebarti and Shilhaha disappeared shortly after the First Dynasty of Babylon faded from the scene. In
the case of Elam, the land may have become the prey of peoples who were
themselves originally fleeing from the Kassite hordes. At any rate, for the
obscurity which covers both Babylonia and Elam at this time the Kassites should
doubtless be held strictly responsible.
CHAPTER V. KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA
WITH startling suddenness we emerge from the obscurity
which covers Iran and Elam for four hundred years after the advent of the
Kassites in Babylonia. A highly entertaining tale in a later chronicle relates
that Hurpatila, king of Elam, besought the Kassite Kurigalzu III (13441320 B.C.) to give battle
with him at Dur Shulgi, a fortress founded east of
the Sealands by the great king of the Third Ur
Dynasty. The outcome of the battle, said the Elamite, should decide the
fortunes of Elam. The forces engaged, Hurpatila was
abandoned by his soldiers, and Elam became a portion of the empire of Kurigalzu.
Although this particular chronicle is very untrustworthy,
the story is not wholly fiction. Hurpatila, it now
appears, was the legitimate ruler of Babylon, where he ruled at least four
years. Driven out by the Assyrians, he may well have taken refuge in Elam,
there to continue the battle with the Assyrian nominee, Kurigalzu.
It is certain, however, that his cause was utterly lost; in Susa Kurigalzu dedicated an agate scaraboid to the god Sataran and a scepter head to Enlil; on
the acropolis he left his own statuette with an inscription recording the
defeat of Susa and Elam and the devastation of Marhashi.
An agate tablet which had once been presented to Inanna in Susa for the life of Shulgi of Ur the Kassite brought back to Nippur,
where he dedicated it anew to Enlil and on it recounted once more his conquest
of Susa in Elam.
Almost immediately the attention of the Kassites was
diverted from Elam and centered on the regions northeast of Babylonia whence
came the supply of fresh recruits for their armies. Arik-den-ilu of Assyria attacked a little kingdom called Nigimti in the ranges east of Arbela and then marched down
into the district housing the Iashubagalla, a tribe
later associated with remnants of the Kassites in the mountains. Adad-nirari I also raided the central Zagros, striking at the Guti and Lullubi remnants; after
his war with the Kassite Nazi-Maruttash, the boundary
between Assyria and Babylonia was established at Arman of Akarsallu,
which is the Holwan region, extending into the
mountains as far as the land Lullubium.
Under these circumstances Elam quickly slipped away
from Kassite overlordship; and Pahir-ishshan, son of Igi-halki, probably as a contemporary of Nazi-Maruttash (1319-1294), founded a new Elamite dynasty.
Unfortunately, his achievements are completely unknown to us, save that he
transported to an unknown site those same precious woods upon which Siwepalarhuppak and Bala-ishshan before him had so carefully labored. Even he left the work to be carried on by
his brother and successor Attar-kittah (ca.
1295-1286), who witnessed the arrival of the objects at the Susa temple. In
like manner we know nothing additional of Attar-kittah;
but his son, Huban-numena (ca. 1285-1266), seems to
have been a ruler of tremendous energy. As “king of Anzan and Susa” and prince of Elam, he was the first to claim the title “expander of
the empire”; and bricks bearing his Elamite inscription, discovered on the
island Liyan in the Persian Gulf, confirm his claim.
The inscription, which invokes the deities Huban, Kiririsha,
the mother goddess of the island, and the Baha, perhaps the local protecting
deities, records that Huban loved him and heard his petitions and that Inshushinak granted him the kingdom. As reward, for the
lives of the women Mishimruh and Rishapanla he is erecting a chapel to these gods and uttering the pious hope that they
give him a prosperous life and a peaceful kingdom. His more illustrious successors, Shutruk-Nahhunte, Kutir-Nahhunte,
and Shilhak-Inshushinak, vied with each other in
commemorating the name of Huban-numena, who had
erected a temple to Kiririsha of Liyan and to Huban and Kiririsha. Shilhak-Inshushinak,
to whom Huban-numena was even a “descendant” of the
great Shilhaha, also testified that Susa and Inshushinak were not neglected.
Untash-Huban
(ca. 1265-1245), son of Huban-numena, justly
acquired a great reputation as a builder. During his reign temples,
sanctuaries, and other religious edifices in abundance were erected on the Susa
acropolis, each carefully described by an appropriate Elamite inscription.
Semitic deities thus honored were Nabu, who was held
in high esteem and received both a temple and a statue, Sin, Belala, Belit-ali (“the Lady of
the City”), and Adad; but even Adad was paired with Shala, known as early as
the period of the sukkalmah, and the great
majority of the buildings erected were for Elamite gods. Perhaps less pretentious
were those for Napratep, Shimut, Pinikir, Ea-Sunkik (“Ea is king”), Hishmitik and Ruhuratir, Nazit, whose building
was under the protection of Huban and Inshushinak,
and a deity whose name is written A.IP (or E).A.SUNKIK. But Upurkupak’s temple, according to the inscription, surpassed all others which had ever been
erected to this deity; and Nahhunte received his
dwelling because he had answered the prayer of Untash-Huban
and performed what he requested. Still more magnificent were surely those for
Huban and Inshushinak. Each separately received a new
domicile, while jointly as the melki ilani, “princes of the gods”, they enjoyed a temple, as
well as a sanctuary known as the nur kiprat, “Light of the World-Quarters.” Nor was Susa
itself forgotten; Untash-Huban dedicated a temple and
a chapel “for my city” to Inshushinak. So numerous
were these constructions that they argue for him abundant resources and
extensive conquests; but these were recorded on steles, of which Shutruk-Nahhunte preserved one, while of the rest all save
fragments of another have since disappeared. Untash-Huban
dedicated to Huban and Inshushinak a limestone statue
of himself by a bilingual inscription in which, it is interesting to note, the
Elamite characters already show the beginnings of the later forms. His almost
exclusive use of the Elamite language for the other records is a sign of
nationalistic feeling which resulted in increasing opposition to Akkadian
culture.
In his reign Elamite metallurgy attained its climax in
a life-size bronze statue of Napir-asu, wife of Untash-Huban, which was cast hollow in a single piece, its
interior filled with fused metal. The queen wears a thin cloth over shoulders
and breasts and a long, sweeping “bell skirt” descending to the ground. Details
of the dress ornamentation are carefully reproduced, as are bracelet and ring
on her folded hands. An Elamite inscription warns him who discovers and
destroys the statue, or who obliterates or erases the name of Napirasu in the inscription, that the anger of Huban, Kiririsha, and Inshushinak will
descend upon him, that Belti, the great goddess, will
deny to him fame and family.
The accession of Kashtiliash III in Babylon (1249) found Untash-Huban ready to
embark upon foreign conquest. His pretext for undertaking a war with the
lowlands may be discovered in the story of Agabtaha,
a leather-worker who fled from Hanigalbat to Kashtiliash and made for him a leather shield. In payment
he received an estate near the city Padan on the
northeast border of Babylonia. The Elamite may well have felt that this was
territory which belonged to Elam, not Babylonia. The ensuing conflict appears
to have been altogether one-sided; the sole purely Akkadian inscription of Untash-Huban commemorates this, perhaps his greatest
achievement. He captured Immiria, the protecting god
of Kashtiliash, and carried him to the Susa acropolis,
where Huban, Inshushinak, and Kiririsha could guard him forever. The stone bearing the grant of Kashtiliash which caused the strife was likewise brought to the capital.
Elam may have suffered from internal troubles in the
next few years, for Untash-Huban was followed not by
a son but by his uncle, Unpatar-Huban, son of the
dynasty’s founder, Pahir-ishshan. This may explain
why Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria, without resistance
from the Elamites, could penetrate the Zagros from Tarsina,
an inaccessible mountain between the cities Shasila and Barpanish on the southern bank of the Lower Zab,
into the region of the widespreading Guti between the lands of Suqush and Lalar. The Assyrian was again unopposed, after
his victory over Kashtiliash, when he added to his
conquests a long list of border towns which were sometimes Elamite and
sometimes Babylonian.
Unpatar-Huban
ruled only a few years when he was succeeded by his brother, Kidin-Hutran (ca. 1242-1222); the latter retaliated on Tukulti-Ninurta by invading Babylonia. The one and one-half
years’ reign of Enlil-nadin-shumi, Tukulti-Ninurta’s puppet on the throne of Babylon,
was brought to a sudden close by this unexpected raid of Kidin-Hutran,
who captured Der, sacked its temple of Anu, and penetrated even to Nippur
before returning to Elam. Tukulti-Ninurta promptly
repaired the damage in Babylon by enthroning Kadashman-Harbe for a year and a half, and then Adad-shum-iddina (1238-1233). The Elamite was not, however, to be
denied. Again he raided the lowlands; crossing the Tigris he advanced as far
west as Isin and as far north as Maradda, Just west
of Nippur, before retreating in safety to his homeland. The energy which
enabled him to make these telling raids is obvious; it is therefore a striking
commentary on the accidental manner in which our Elamite sources have been
recovered that the record of his exploits is found only in Babylonian
literature, and that, aside from the lists of Shilhak-Inshushinak,
the name of Kidin-Hutran does not appear in Elamite
records.
Kidin-Hutran was followed by Halludush-Inshu-shinak, of
whose relation to his predecessors we are ignorant and of whose reign we know
nothing. He in turn was succeeded by a son, Shutruk-Nahhunte (ca. 1207-1171). This sovereign inaugurated the really great period of Elamite
history, a period we might with some justification designate as the “classical”
period.
One inscription of Shutruk-Nahhunte,
could we but translate it accurately, would give us some idea of his numerous activities.
Unfortunately, the text is extremely difficult and in many places the meaning
is obscure. An introduction describes the transportation of a stele from Aia to Susa and its
dedication to Inshushinak. The record then states
that many earlier kings had not known the place where certain choice woods were
to be found, but that he importuned Inshushinak, his
god, who heard his prayers. The route lay by way of Tahirman, Teda, and Kel, then by way
of Hashmar and Shahnam.
Further, many former kings had never heard of the places called Shali, Mimurashi, and Luppuni. With Inshushinak’s aid
he discovered the place where the choice woods grew; and there he forested,
just as did a few kings whose names he did not know, and just as did Siwe-palarhuppak, Bala-ishshan, Pahir-ishshan, and Attar-kittah.
Thus with his god’s aid he achieved that which many had sought to do and few
had accomplished; he, too, brought choice woods to Susa, where by the grace of
Huban and Inshushinak he worked them and then in the
temple on the acropolis dedicated them to Inshushinak,
his god. With just pride he boasted that things which former kings had not done
he had been enabled to accomplish, and all these achievements he had brought
about for the glory of Huban and Inshushinak. When he
discovered a stele far up in Anzan, he was forced to
admit that he did not know the name of the king who had erected it. The
inscription which makes this frank confession continues with an obscure passage
referring to Dur Untash, later known as Dur Undasi, on the Hithite or Idide River, and to a place Tikni;
it concludes with a dedication of the stele as the ruler’s offering to his
beloved god.
Other inscriptions of Shutruk-Nahhunte are more easily understood. With baked bricks he beautified a chapel of Inshushinak in Susa and uttered the prayer that the deity
look with favor upon his good deed. When a temple of the goddess Manzat built by former kings fell into ruin, he removed the
debris and searched diligently for the inscribed bricks which those rulers had
placed in its walls; with his own new bricks he restored the temple to its
former glory. Stone basins for the cult of the Elamite gods, but especially for Inshushinak and Suhsipa,
suggest that the sacrificial offerings were regularly performed. The island Liyan belonged to Shutruk-Nahhunte’s empire, and there he re-erected and rededicated to Kiririsha the temple which Huban-numena had once devoted to
this goddess. Practically every inscription proclaims opposition to Akkadian
culture; Shutruk-Nahhunte’s only text written in
Akkadian is a dedication to Ishmekarab, an Akkadian deity
well known in Elam since the days of the sukkalmahs.
Meanwhile Ashurdan I
(1189-1154) had begun his long reign in Assyria. Soon he turned upon the weak Zamama-shum-iddina of Babylon and wrested from him Zaban on the Lower Zab, Irria,
and Akarsallu. Shutruk-Nahhunte at once realized the impotence of Babylon, and with his son Kutir-Nahhunte marshaled Elam’s forces. His own inscription speaks of a camp in Eli, of
capturing seven hundred cities as far as Mara and then a hundred more. He
entered Babylonia. In Eshnunna he found a statue of a
former ruler and one of Manishtusu. From Sippar he took Naram-Sin’s
famous “Stele of Victory” and the great stone bearing Hammurabi’s law code; a
portion of the latter was erased for his own inscription, but the blank space
was never filled. In the vicinity of Kish he seized as booty an obelisk of
Manishtusu and two more statues of the same sovereign, which his inscription
declares he found “in Akkad.” He was now in the land Karintash,
and a stele of Meli-Shipak fell into his hands.
Advancing to Babylon, he overthrew the unfortunate Zamama-shum-iddina,
who had reigned but a single year (1174), and established his own son Kutir-Nahhunte on the throne. Adding further insult, he
laid tribute and tax upon the subjected districts, a stated number of talents
and minas upon Dur Kurigalzu, Sippar, Dur Sharrukin, and Opis. This tribute
was doubtless intended for the erection and maintenance of temples to
Babylonian deities, for there is mention of bricks which should restore the
walls of their dwellings. Then, loaded with monumental spoil, Shutruk-Nahhunte withdrew to Susa, where his trophies were
dedicated to Inshushinak with new inscriptions and
set up near the Inshushinak temple.
Official Babylonian historians refused the title “king
of Babylon” to Kutir-Nahhunte and gave it to Enlil-nadin-ahhe, who kept up the
Kassite resistance three more years. Finally, in 1171 B.C., Kutir-Nahhunte put an end to the Kassite Dynasty once and for all. Late Babylonian odes then
attempted to gloss over the unpleasant fact of the Elamite’s rule by insisting
that the gods of Babylon had themselves summoned him to the throne. The Elamite
felt altogether differently, and Babylon ceased to be the capital. Its gods had
shown themselves powerless, and the image of Marduk himself was carried off to
Susa, where Kutir-Nahhunte now succeeded his father
on the throne. On his way thither he wrested from her temple one other famed
Babylonian deity, Nana, the Lady of Uruk. To the actual number of years she remained
captive in Susa Ashurbanipal of Assyria added a round thousand when he declared
that fifteen hundred and thirty-five years before his time Kudur-Nanhundi,
an Elamite, had not feared the oath of the great gods but had laid his hands
upon the temples of Akkad and carried away Nana to Susa.
The reign of Kutir-Nahhunte in Elam (ca. 11701166) appears to have been short. He had time to
rebuild the temple of Kiririsha on the island Liyan and to dedicate it for his own life, for the life of Nahhunte-Utu, his wife, and for the lives of her progeny.
He refounded the ruined sanctuary of the deity Lagamal in Susa and placed it under the protection of Inshushinak. Before his accession to the throne he had
already surrounded the Inshushinak sanctuary on the
northwestern part of the Susa mound with a wall of baked brick panels or
bas-reliefs portraying a man-bull worshiping the date palm; after his accession
he placed his own statue within this sanctuary, which he began to beautify on a
large scale. Death brought a sudden end to his activities and placed a greater
conqueror than he on the throne. His decease marked the beginning of a new era
and the dawn of a brief but better day.
CHAPTER VI. THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE
SHILHAK-INSHUSHINAK (ca. 1165-1151 B.C.),
brother of Kutir-Nahhunte, was without question the
greatest of the Elamite rulers. His reign marks the summit of Elam’s political
attainments, and perhaps also the height of her commercial and economic
importance; but the very effort to extend his borders was a contributing cause
to the collapse of the empire after his death. Of these things we know little;
we can only trace his achievements on the field of battle and attempt to
picture the Susa of his time. All else lies hidden in unexcavated and unknown
mounds of Elam.
An inscription written late in the reign gives some
account of his early exploits. It begins with a long invocation to gods
worshiped in Elam: Huban, Inshu- shinak, Kiririsha, Nannar, Nahhunte, Temti, Sili, Shimut, Hutran, Tiru, the Nap-bahappi-hutip-nap-pip, perhaps deities guarding the dwellings of
the gods, as well as the god of the heavens, the gods of Elam, and the gods of
Susa. The king declares himself the son of Shutruk-Nahhunte,
beloved “descendant” of the woman Beyak, beloved
brother of Kutir-Nahhunte, the chosen one of Nahhunte the mighty prince of the Elamite gods. He has
inscribed this stele for his own life, for the life of Nahhunte-Utu,
once the wife of Kutir-Nahhunte and now his own mate,
and for the lives of their children, namely, his sons Huteludush-Inshushinak, Shilhina-hamru-Lagamar, Kutir-Huban, Temti-turkatash, and Lili-irtash and his daughters Ishnikarabbat, Urutuk-El- halahu, Utu-e-hihhi-Pinikir, and Bar-Uli. He recites
his own and his wife’s pious deeds toward Inshushinak,
repeatedly asking the god’s mercy and begging that his prayers be heard and his
requests granted.
All this is but introduction; the political historian
rejoices at what follows. In eight groups, corresponding perhaps to eight
separate campaigns, Shilhak-Inshushinak lists the
cities which he conquered. Each group is preceded by a prayer and followed by
the name of the district in which the cities were located; once the names of
over two hundred and fifty such places were to be read on this stele.
Unfortunately, today less than a hundred are clearly legible, and only too
often the names of the districts have been obliterated. Nevertheless, an
analysis of the names is well worth the time. The names most clearly recognizable
are those beginning with bit, “house,” or sha, “of,” for these
indicate their Semitic origin. Others bespeak their Kassite, or at least
Caucasian, sources, while others again are completely unknown.
The first group once contained forty-two place names.
Today there are legible only Sha Shilitu, perhaps Sha Beltia, Bit Buli, Shenkuru, Bit Nappahe (“house of
blacksmiths”), Sha Imire (“of asses”), Bit Nakiru (which may be the Nakri tribe subsequently defeated by Tiglathpileser III of
Assyria), and Bit Pilantu. In a second group only Sha Barbari (“of wolves”) and Sha .... Nankari (“of .... carpenters”) can be read. The third group
once comprised thirty-one cities in the district Ukarsillam Ebeh. Since this includes the Akarsallu which had just been captured by Ashurdan and the Ebih Mountain which Shamshi-Adad
V of Assyria was to cross on his way from Zaban (modern Altun Koprü) to the
city Me Turnat on the Diyala River, it is not
difficult to understand where Shilhak-Inshushinak had
campaigned when he gives the names of the conquered cities. Here we find Sellam, Tunni, Matku (which must be Madga at
modern Tuz Khurmatli, from
which Gudea had once obtained gypsum), Bit Siniriba,
Bit Katashman (“house of Kadashman”),
Bit Lassi, Bit Sin-shemi (known also to Nebuchadnezzar
I of Babylon, who granted land of its district on the Tigris to his priest of
Enlil),5Bit Etelle, Appi-sini-beti, Sha Warad Egalli (“of the palace servant”), and Kiprat.
The fourth group lay in the district .... tilla and
comprised eleven cities. The names Arrapha, Nuza, and perhaps Titurru (“the
bridge”) tell us at once that we are in the modern Kirkuk region, even though
the remaining legible names, Hanbate and Sha Nishe (“of peoples”) are unknown. With forty-one sites located
in the Durun, Ebeh, Shatrak, and Ialman regions, we
are back to the Turnat or Diyala, Ebih,
and modern Holwan districts. The city names of this
fifth group which may still be read are Tunnati, Sha Hanta, Bit Rie Rappi (“house of the chief shepherd”), Bit Bahe, Sha Purna Mashhum (a Kassite name meaning “of the protection of
god”), perhaps Bit Ishtar, Huratu, Ishirtu sha Adad (“sanctuary of Adad”), Sha Anpima, the Great and the Small Bit Rituti,
Bit Ittatu, Reshu, Bit Rikim Adad (“house of the thunder of Adad”), and Bit Mugia. Bit Ishtar later found Tiglathpileser III in its midst, while Reshu is probably the Rashi
tribe of Arameans, well known to the Assyrians from Sargon onward and located
in the mountains east of Der, where was its capital, Bit Imbi.
The sixth group once named forty-nine sites in the
district Balahuta, Ialman,
and A. . . .zahaya; even the names betray the modern Holwan region. Here are Nahish Harare, Sha Hilik, Sha Balihu, Murattash (which Tiglathpileser I found south of the Lower Zab in the midst of the mountains Asaniu and Atuma), Dunnu, Bit Uzali, Bit Hanipi, Sha Kupia, three Bitati (“houses”), Bit Nagia, Sha Kattarzah, Duhupuna (which Shamshi-Adad V was to discover south of the Turnat River and Mount Ialman), Annahhutash, Bit Sin-ishmanni,
Bit Silia (Assyrian Bit Saalli or Shaali), with its capital Bit sha Ilti (known to the Assyrians as Dur Illatai,
where Arameans took refuge), Bit Zahmi, Bit Hubbani (“house of cisterns”), Sha Marazza,
Sha Iklai, Sha Shangibari; Tintu Ili-erish, Bit Matimu, Bit Laqipu, Tintu, Bit Rikim Adad (already
named in the preceding group), Bit Tamtea, and Harbatu. The last names of this group, proving that we have
reached the Kassite homeland, are Bit Nap Shumalia (“house of the god Shumalia”), Bit Tasak Sunkik (or Bit Tarish Sharru), Bit Milshipak (“house of Meli-Shipak”),
and Sha Burra Hutte. The group is closed with Bit Barbari (“house of wolves”) and “the city Kaplu.”
The seventh group names Bit Kilalla,
Bit Nankari (“house of the carpenters”), Tan Silam, Bit Kunzubati, Puhutu, Nakapu, Zallat, Kishu, and Bit Rapiqu; the district name is . . . .kattar.
The eighth group once named twenty-six sites; of these only Kitan (or Natan),
Nar Sillam (“the river of Sillam”), Harap, and Bit Kimi! Adad are today wholly legible,
while the name of the district cannot be read.
So much for this great stele, which continues with
another dedication formula to the gods of Elam, the gods of Anshan, and the
gods of Susa. Other stele fragments add other names. One cites the district Halman Niripuni and formerly
named fourteen places in a district of which... akmish Lanhu... alone can be deciphered. Another names Niripuni Shurutuha as a district,
and in an unknown region places the sites Makshia,
Sha Kutu, Asse, Sha Kilka..., Kishshimu, Harpa..., and Talzana.
The campaigns of Shilhak-Inshushinak stand out in bold relief after a study of these lists. First Akarsallu and then the Ebih Mountain region between modern Altun Koprü and the Diyala River fell into his hands. Thence he
turned westward and reduced a number of Aramean tribes which, even at this
early date, were settled well up the east bank of the Tigris. With the capture of Madga or Tuz Khurmatli he was in territory which in ordinary times was
indisputably Assyrian and from which it was an easy step northward to Nuzi and Arrapha or Kirkuk. At
this point he was less than seventy miles due east of Ashur; it is therefore
not farfetched to assume that Shilhak-Inshushinak himself brought to an end the long reign of Ashurdan (1154 b.c.). With Durun and Ialman he was back at the exit from the mountains of
the Turnat or Diyala River in modern Holwan, from which he penetrated eastward into lands which
had once housed the Kassites.
The Elamite’s control was far from absolute. Although
his brother had brought to an end the rule of Kassite kings in Babylon, he had
been unable to retain the region, and at Isin in the northern part of the
alluvium a new power had sprung into being. Under Marduk-shapik-zeri this power now began to interfere in the affairs of
Assyria, where, we may suspect. Elamite overlordship was the real cause of
revolt and unrest following the death of Ashurdan. Shilhak-Inshushinak could ill afford such intervention and
at once left Elam to chastise the sovereign of Isin. Marching to the Tigris,
where he defeated an army sent against him, he advanced to the city Hussi and proceeded up the Euphrates as far as Nimettu-Marduk, by which he may mean Nimitti-Enlil,
the wall of Babylon. There he may have met defeat, for it is clear that
henceforth he held little control over any part of Babylonia or Assyria.
The great king still possessed, however, a mighty empire.
He ruled Liyan in the Persian Gulf, for there he
restored Huban-numena’s temple to Kiririsha and a joint temple to Huban and Kiririsha. His
territory reached inland almost to Persepolis, for bricks inscribed with his
name and dedicated for his own life, for the life of his wife, and for the
lives of their progeny have been found in territory of the Mamassani tribe halfway between Ramuz and Shiraz. When the Balahute, located in the central Zagros, carried away
vessels of Inshushinak, he brought them back by
force, making his camp in Eli, Anzan, Ulan, and Sha Purna Mashhum. Like Huban-numena and Shutruk-Nahhunte, he
employed the title “expander of the empire,” and no one had a better claim.
During his reign Inshushinak,
once merely the local god of Susa, became the supreme deity of the realm; and
temples to him arose in all parts of the kingdom. A single inscription mentions
the erection of temples in Tettu, Sha Atta Mitik, Ekallat (whose deities
were ordinarily Adad and Shala), Berraberra, Sha Attata Ekal Likrub, Marrut (probably the Nar Marrati or Sealands), and Sha Hantallak.
But the Lord of Susa was not honored to the total exclusion of other Elamite
gods. Lakamar or Lagamar received a temple in Bit Hulmi and Huban one in Beptar Siyan Sit, while the edifices erected to Kiririsha alone and to Huban and Kiririsha on the island Liyan have already been noted. From the
enumeration of these temples we obtain further corroboration of the far-extending
empire of Shilhak-Inshushinak. He had conquered the
whole east Tigris country clear to the Lower Zab, while at least a part of the Sealands to the southwest of Susa was also in his
possession. Doubtless some of the sites named are to be located within Iran at
no great distance from the later capital of the Achaemenids, Persepolis.
A tremendous income from all parts of this empire now
flowed in to Susa, and with wealth such as no Elamite ruler had before
possessed he made this metropolis equal to the other great cities of his time.
Many as were the industrial and commercial enterprises carried on by private
individuals in the business and residential section, that part of the city
which housed the palaces and temples was the scene of even greater activity. Shilhak-Inshushinak brought to completion the sanctuary of Inshushinak which his brother had begun; at the side of his
brother’s statue he placed his own image of baked brick and surrounded the
temple with bas-reliefs on which was his prayer that Inshushinak look with favor on his good deed. South of this he restored the sanctuary which Untash-Huban had erected to Pinikir and the temple for Suhsipa, already worshiped by Shutruk-Nahhunte. For the safety of himself and family he
constructed a sacred inclosure in the sanctuary of
Tab-migirshu; in the inclosure of Beltia (“my lady”) he incased the altar with new
ornamentation and surrounded it with copper objects, while that for “Huban the
exalted” had an alabaster stele. He restored a temple for Manzat and Shimut, the latter of whom received particular
attention as “the Elamite god.” For Inshshinak and Lagamar he rebuilt another, with the confession that he
did not know the names of the kings who had first erected it, and still another
for Ishnikarab, known in the earlier period as Ishmekarab, who also protected a doorway in his own new
dwelling and in whose honor he named a daughter Ishnikarabbat.
Doubtless it was to one of these deities that Shilhak-Inshushinak erected the 14-foot-square sanctuary
which was uncovered by excavations in the southern part of Susa and which
housed a superb limestone statue of Puzur-Inshushinak.
Perhaps the winding stairway of 120 steps descending over 85 feet to a lower
level of the mound led to a temple dedicated to another of these gods.
Such constructions as these paled into insignificance
before two massive temples which arose on the southwestern corner of the
citadel mound. Architects’ drawings on fragmentary clay tablets prove that they
were not erected at haphazard, and chance has preserved for us an actual model
of this portion of the mound. It is a low bronze table surmounted by reproductions
of these temples, the smaller two-staged, the larger three-staged. At sight of
them we involuntarily recall the “temple towers of glazed brick with horns of
shining bronze” which Ashurbanipal destroyed at Susa some five hundred years
later. Two standing-stones flank the larger temple, before which is the model
of a stone platform with cups for the sacrificial blood. A vase, another platform,
and a stele are represented, as is also a sacred grove of trees; the latter in
turn brings to mind Ashurbanipal’s description of “sacred groves into which no
stranger penetrates, whose borders he never oversteps.” One of two nude shaved
and crouching figures holds a vase to be used in the sacrifice. At one corner
of the table an incription tells how Shilhak-Inshushinak made this bronze object and proclaimed
its name “the Rising Sun.”
The first and smaller temple was erected over the site-of Shulgi’s temple to Ninhursag and was doubtless dedicated to the same goddess, though possibly she now bore a
native name, such as Kiririsha or Pinikir.
Four foundation deposits marked the temple proper, which measured about 50X25
feet, with additional rooms on all sides. Four other deposits marked the
corners of the inner sanctuary, which was slightly less than 20 feet square.
Statues of Puzur-Inshushinak and a stele of
Manishtusu were to be observed within the temple, while the bronze statue of Napirasu, queen of Untash-Huban,
adorned the interior of the holy of holies. On all sides of the temple extended
a pavement of baked bricks laid in bitumen, the monotony of which was
frequently broken by upright Elamite steles.
This temple likewise yielded in magnificence to the
new edifice for the Lord of Susa, Inshushinak. His
temple stood on a platform over 130 feet long and half as wide, its corners
oriented almost due north and south. Beneath its foundations of burned brick
set in bitumen there were again eight foundation deposits, four under the
corners of the temple proper, which measured over 67X33 feet, and four under
the angles of the inner sanctuary, which was over 26X16 feet in size. These
deposits consisted of statues of Puzur- Inshushinak inscribed with proto-Elamite characters;
electrum pendants, bracelets, leaves, and rings; bronze basins and rolled
bronze leaves; silver and stone vases; and tablets of Shulgi,
the mightiest king of Ur’s Third Dynasty. On either side of the temple gateway
stood a life-sized lion of glazed clay; these were the “colossi, the guardians
of the temple,” described by Ashurbanipal, who added that fierce wild oxen
adorned the gates. The latter swung on huge inscribed stone sockets, whose
inscriptions list the former kings who constructed Inshushinak’s temple. At the doorway decorative clay cones or glazed knobs told how Shilhak-Inshushinak dedicated the entrance to his god for
his own life, for the life of Nahhunte-Utu, and for
the lives of their children; one knob was dedicated to Zana-Tentar,
who would seem to be 'The Lady of Babylon.” Also at the doorway inscribed
bricks, a few of which were stamped, bore Shilhak-Inshushinak’s boast that he restored what former kings had built and that he placed each of
their names on bricks that their deed might be commemorated in his own day.
The temple walls, unsupported by buttresses, were made
of unburned brick veneered with well baked brick. Here and there an inscribed
brick, sometimes glazed, recorded the name of a famous king who had erected the
temple to Inshushinak. Thanks to the royal antiquary,
many of the sukkalmah’s were so commemorated. Kuk-Nashur and Kuk-Kirwash, each of
whom by a Sumerian inscription had dedicated a temple within the temple area to
the god, were especially honored; their Sumerian texts were reproduced, and for
the edification of his readers Shilhak-Inshushinak confides that he has translated their inscriptions, found their names, and
therefore commemorated their deeds.3But since an Akkadian text of Temti-agun, recording the dedication of a statue to Inshushinak for the life of his superior, Kutir-Nahhunte, received practically identical comments, it
is obvious that Shilhak-Inshushinak could neither
read nor interpret the Sumerian! Still another type of brick set into the walls
manifests the ruler’s interest in the more immediate present; it names all his
children and dedicates the temple as his offering for the city of Susa!
Within the building, columns of inscribed triangular
bricks supported its wooden roof. Beautifully glazed bricks, singly and in
reliefs, added the necessary color to the interior walls. But the most curious
relief is of bronze. It portrays a number of warriors marching in single file,
all identically clad in helmet with pointed visor, sleeveless jacket, short
skirt, and upturned boots. Their beards are cut square and hang on the breasts,
and tassels from the helmet cover the nape of the neck and ears. A short curved
sword is held aloft in the right hand, a bow is suspended from the left, a mace
is thrust through the skirt, while a strap over the right shoulder supports a
quiver on the back. An inscription, today all but illegible, may treat of
conquests and the presentation of booty to the deities Manzat, Nahhunte, Lagamar, Pinikir, and Kiririsha.
The temple altar was guarded by an inscribed bronze
rod, a hollow cylinder over 14 feet long cast in a single piece. The
inscription describes its manufacture and its dedication to Inshushinak for the lives of the ruler and his family, but it also contains a lengthy curse
on those who would damage his handicraft. The curse invokes Hutran,
the beloved “descendant” of Kiririsha and Huban, as
well as Huban and Kiririsha themselves, Inshushinak and Nahhunte. Stele
inscriptions tell us that Shilhak-Inshushinak erected
a splendid new altar with ornamentation of copper, around which he set copper
cult vessels and other objects, which may have included replicas of horned
animals, for its protection. The same inscriptions add that he placed upon the
altar objects which we may translate “magnificent likenesses” of Shutruk-Nahhunte, Kutir-Nahhunte,
himself, Nahhunte-Utu, Shimut-nikatash,
his brother, and all his children; if these were indeed images, we need no
longer question the deification of Elamite monarchs or of the entire ruling
family.
A paved court extending on all sides of the temple was
surrounded by a wall, doubtless bearing reliefs, and by numerous Elamite
steles. Three of these we have already studied minutely, for they outlined Shilhak-Inshushinak’s far-flung conquests. Two others
described the erection of the temple and its sanctuary; of these, one was
dedicated to Huban, Kiririsha, and Inshushinak, the other to Inshushinak alone. A sixth listed the former kings who had erected a temple to Inshushinak and enumerated various sites throughout the
kingdom where other temples to Elamite gods might be found. A seventh described
the building of a temple to Manzat and Shimut; an eighth has come down to us in fragments only. These
steles doubtless made an impressive appearance, but to the worshiping Elamites
a sight more astounding must have been the southern entrance to the temple,
reserved for trophies from foreign lands. Here were on display the great law
code of Hammurabi, the splendid obelisk of Manishtusu, the famous “Stele of
Victory” of Naram-Sin, and boundary stones without
number bearing grants of land. These were the embodied proofs of the ruler’s
prowess in arms, of his distinction abroad and at home. They and the temple inclosure suggested the glory of the Elamite empire; but
after that empire had decayed, they remained but an echo of power gone forever.
History affords frequent examples of empires which
reach their prime only to pass into immediate decline, and Elam was no
exception. A process of disintegrtion began shortly
after 1150 B.C., when Shilhak-Inshushinak gave place
to Huteludush-Inshushinak, whom he had named first in
the lists of his sons. Huteludush-Inshushinak himself
many times claims descent from both Kutir-Nahhunte and Shilhak-Inshushinak, and once from the father of
both, Shutruk-Nahhunte, as well. In reality it would
seem that he was a son of Nahhunte-Utu, who was
perhaps a daughter of Shutruk-Nahhunte married first
to Kutir-Nahhunte and then to Shilhak-Inshushinak.
Without daring to assume the title borne by his predecessors, “king of Anzan and Susa,” Huteludush-Inshushinak persisted in calling himself the “expander of the empire,” though without just
cause. A tendency to archaize is noticeable both in the sign forms and in the
content of his inscriptions, and this in itself suggests that the great days
of Elam were in the past. The fact that no inscription of his has been found on
the island Liyan in the Persian Gulf may indicate that Liyan was now lost to his kingdom, although his
erection of a temple for Upurkupak in Shalulikki, later Shallukea,
proves that at least a part of the Sealands was yet
subservient.
The constructions of Huteludush-Inshushinak in Susa were neither pretentious nor numerous. In Kipu,
perhaps a part of the temple area, he erected a temple to Ishnikarab for his own life, for the lives of his legitimate brothers, and for the lives
of his sons, daughters, and relatives. For the goddess Manzat he made a stone door socket for his own life, for the life of Nahhunte-Utu, his revered mother, and for the lives of his
legitimate brothers. This he placed in the temple of Manzat and Shimut which had been erected by Shilhak-Inshushinak, and again he calls the latter deity
the “Elamite god.” With small flat green-glazed bricks he constructed a
diminutive rectangular chapel for Inshushinak and
declared that the anger of Huteludush-Inshushinak and
of the ancient Shilhaha should descend upon him who
disturbed it. A stele which may be attributed to him calls upon the gods of
Anshan and the gods of Susa as well as Inshushinak, Kiririsha, Nahhunte, Upurkupak, Tiru, and Manzat. Although remembered by the neo-Elamite Shutruk-Nahhunte, it is clear that Huteludush-Inshushinak was a ruler of little importance and that during his reign the power of Elam
rapidly declined.
The appearance of a great king in Babylonia, Nebuhadnezzar I, coincided with the disintegration of the
Elamite power. The Babylonian made the most of his opportunity. In his own
inscription he recounts the victories of the Elamite Shutruk-Nahhunte and his son over the Babylonians and tells of his resolve to avenge these
victories or to die in the attempt. With the remnant of his people he
penetrated the country of the Elamites and reached the sources of the Uknu or Karkhah River, probably
at a point east of Mandali, where he awaited their
attack. Backed by the army of his predecessor on the throne, Huteludush-Inshushinak was not loath to give battle. The
warriors of Babylonia, as Nebuchadnezzar himself admits, were badly smitten,
his cavalry forced to flee in disorder. He dared not risk a second engagement
but retreated to Dur Apil Sin. As he puts it: “The
Elamite followed, and I fled before him; I sat down on the bed of weeping and
sighing.” He then appealed to Marduk, who had been held captive in Elam since
the days of Kutir-Nahhunte. Marduk heard his laments
and commanded Nebuchadnezzar to bring him from hostile Elam.
Thus far the Babylonian had been totally unsuccessful;
and if Huteludush-Inshushinak had been able to hold
loyal his Elamite subjects, he might have claimed a complete victory. But Ritti-Marduk, lord of the “house” of Karziabku,
a land not far from modern Holwan, transferred his
support to the Babylonian monarch;57 and two priests of the god Ria, Sha- mua and his son Shamaia, in the
city Din Sharri not far from Susa, fled from the face of the Elamite king and
were received by Nebuchadnezzar.58 With such unexpected help, Nebuchadnezzar
could renew his attack. Since Der no longer admitted Elamite suzerainty, it
was made the base for a forced march of thirty hours into Elam. Heat, dust, and
lack of water impeded his progress; but Huteludush-Inshushinak,
for what reason we know not, offered no opposition, and Nebuchadnezzar reached
the Ulai River not far from Susa. There the Elamites
finally gathered and, as the Babylonian told it, gave such battle that the sun
was darkened as when dust storms sweep by. Ritti-Marduk
valiantly distinguished himself against his former master, and at the command
of Ishtar and Adad “the king of Elam turned back and stood on his mountain,”
that is, died. Nebuchadnezzar triumphed; he captured the land of Elam; he
plundered its possessions. Lowland and highland he filled with destruction and
made like a desert; when at last Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylonia he was
not alone, for with him Marduk took the highroad, the path of joy, the desired
way to Babylon from hostile Elam.
Likewise the god Ria was taken from Din Sharri and
carried to the alluvium to rejoice the hearts of Shamua and Shamaia. In the city Hussi,
not long since ravaged by Shilhak-Inshushinak, a
permanent home for the deity was established and was deeded for his maintenance.
Included in this grant were lands of Opis and Dur Sharrukin, once tributary to Shutruk-Nahhunte,
as well as the region of Hussi of Bit Sinasharidu on the bank of the Takkiru Canal, Bit Bazi on the Royal Canal, and Bit Akarnakkandi, which was specifically designated as the city
of the god Ria. Ritti-Marduk also prayed his new lord
to grant freedom to his own ancestral lands. He declared that under a former
king they had been free, but that under an enemy rule and contrary to their
custom—he is obviously referring to the Elamites—they had been brought under
the dues of Namar. Nebuchadnezzar promptly released
from these dues the lands of Bit Karziabku, together
with their horses, cattle, flocks, and woods, and proclaimed the independence
of the citizens. A curse, which threatens any governor of Namar who shall infringe this royal charter, invokes Ninurta and Adad; Shumalia, “the lady of the shining mountains, who dwells on
the summits”; Nergal and Nana; Shahan, the shining god, son of the temple of
Der; Sin and the Lady of Akkad; and the gods of Bit Habban.
Nebuchadnezzar also claims that he overthrew the
mighty Lullubi and despoiled the Kassites. We know
nothing of an expedition into Lullubi territory save
when he attacked Elam, and he may only be referring to Lullubi troops in the Elamite army; his defeat of the Kassites may in turn refer only
to his supplanting their dynasty. His claim of conquest over Elam was doubtless
exaggerated, and his unlimited control of the country is denied by the fact
that a younger brother of Huteludush-Inshushinak named Shilhina-hamru-Lagamar succeeded to the Elamite
throne and was remembered into New Elamite times. Nevertheless, it is certain
that with the death of Huteludush-Inshushinak the
dynasty begun by Pahir-ishshan withdrew from active
participation in international affairs.
For a time the scene of attempted conquest by westerners
shifted to the north of Elam, where Ashur-resh-ishi followed Nebuchadnezzar in claiming a defeat of the Lullubi and all the Guti in their
mountain regions. A few years later Marduk-nadin-ahhe of Babylon defeated Tiglathpileser I of Assyria and captured, together with its gods Adad and Shala, the city Ekallate, which had once been taken by Shilhak- Inshushinak. Tiglathpileser responded by crossing the Lower Zab well up in the mountains and attacking the
lands Murattash and Saradaush. Some time after his tenth year Tiglathpileser fought another skirmish with the Babylonians above the city Zaban opposite Arzuhina or modern Altun Koprü; he then secured the city Arman and the plain
of the city Salum and plundered from Akarsallu as far as Lubdu; by
crossing the Radanu River he made the cities at the
foot of Mounts Kamulla and Kashtilla a part of his kingdom.
Despite these raids there was no material advance of
any Babylonian power into the eastern mountains, while Elam itself seems to
have disappeared completely as a political entity. Two of the three kings of
the Second Dynasty of the Sealands, Simmash-Shipak and Kashshu-nadin-ahi, bear names which bespeak their Kassite origin,
and Mar-biti-apal-usur (ca.
996-991 B.C.), who followed the Bazi Dynasty, was
called a “descendant of Elam”; but these facts tell us absolutely nothing about
the land itself. In the northwestern part of Susa, where Kutir-Nah-hunte and Shilhak-Inshushinak had
erected a sanctuary to Inshushinak, tombs covered the
site of the earlier buildings; and even the tombs were hopelessly poverty-stricken.
For a period of over three hundred years after the death of Huteludush-Inshushinak our Elamite sources are completely silent. Thus it is no exaggeration to say
that with his death, so far as Elam is concerned, come dark centuries.
CHAPTER VII.
|