The Early Iron Age and the Death of Kings: Part II

Lamassu from the palace of Tukulti-Ninurta I
where the king was slain

In the previous post I discussed the fate of the Mycenaean, Hittite and Egyptian kingdoms and regions following the Bronze Age Collapse up until roughly the year 1000BC. I will now try and discuss Assyria, Babylonia and Elam for the same period. Because Assyria and Babylonia in particular were so closely interlocked I will discuss them as a whole, briefly discussing Elam and also the new developments that happened during this period.

Tukulti-Ninurta returned to Babylon and brought [...] near. He destroyed the wall of Babylon and put the Babylonians to the sword. He took out the property of the Esagila and Babylon amid the booty. The statue of the great lord Marduk he removed from his dwelling-place and sent him to Assyria. He put his governors in Karduniaš (Babylonia). For seven years, Tukulti-Ninurta controlled Karduniaš.
Chronicle P

In the late 1200s BC Tukulti-Ninurta I reigned in Assyria. Capitalising on the triumphs of his predecessors over the Mitanni, he defeated the Hittites in Syria and pushed Assyrian control westwards. A dispute between the Kassite king Kashtiliash IV of Babylon and Tukulti-Ninurta I saw the Assyrians win a decisive victory over the Kassites. Tukulti-Ninurta I exploited his victory by attempting to reduce Babylon to a provincial city, tearing down walls, deporting the royal family, removing important religious items and appointing governors over the city. Babylon was viewed as a holy city and this degradation of its status may have been viewed as sacrilegious by his subjects. This was to be the first instance of a perennial problem for Assyrian kings: Once Babylon was subjected, how could it be governed?

Disputes appear to have arisen between the Assyrian king and his priests and nobles in Asshur, with the king founding a new city/fortress capital a few miles from the city of Asshur, called Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta. This would have further alienated the populace of Asshur. A rebellion in Babylon removed the Assyrian governors and the king's sons rebelled and besieged and killed Tukulti-Ninurta I in his new fortress.

After the Akkadian officers of Karduniaš (Babylon) had rebelled and put Adad-šuma-ušur on his father's throne, Aššur-nasir-apli, son of that Tukulti-Ninurta who had carried criminal designs against Babylon, and the officers of Assyria rebelled against Tukulti-Ninurta, removed him from the throne, shut him up in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta and killed him.
Chronicle P

In Babylon, Adad-Suma-Usur had come to the throne in the later years of Tukulti-Ninurta I and restored Babylonian power in the region, while the Assyrian princes who had conspired against their father struggled for the throne. Adad-Suma-Usur was in a sufficiently strong position to write insulting letters to the king of Assyria and his viceroy, Ili-Pada (the governor of the lands of the Mitanni).

[The god Ash]ur to Aššur-nirari and Ili-Paddâ […through] slovenliness, drunkenness, and indecisiveness, things have taken a turn for the worse for you. Now there is neither sense nor reason in your heads. Since the great [gods] have driven you mad you speak […]. Your faces […..with] iniquitous and criminal counsel
Adad-šuma-usur, letter to Aššur-nirari and Ili-Paddâ

The Assyrians tried to reassert their supremacy by attacking the Babylonians and were disastrously defeated. Their defeat was so total that the Assyrian army officers mounted a coup in the field, surrendered all their prisoners from previous campaigns and handed over their king to the Babylonians, placing a son of Ili-Pada, Ninurta-apal-Ekur, on the throne, possibly at the suggestion of the Babylonians.

Adad-šuma-usur mustered his troops, attacked, and defeated him. The officers of Assyria seized Enlil-kudurri-usur, their lord, and gave him to Adad-šuma-usur,
Walker Chronicle

Kudurru of Meli-Sipak

Meli-Sipak succeeded as king of Babylon in the early 1100’s BC and formed a marriage alliance with the Elamite royal family. The Elamites were at the height of their power at this point and, while they were powerful enemies of Babylon, were also enemies of Assyria. This dynastic marriage proved to be a disaster in the long term for Babylon. However, during Meli-Sipak’s reign, there was peace between Assyria, Babylon and Elam. It was during this period that the Hittite Empire collapsed and that Egypt came under threat from the Sea Peoples but to a certain extent Mesopotamia was isolated from these disasters. They were inland and far from the Mediterranean, with substantial irrigation systems to protect them from droughts and other natural disasters (unless these irrigation systems could be disrupted by invasion).

Why I, who am a king, son of a king, seed of a king, scion of a king, who am king (?) for the lands, for the land of Babylonia and the land of [El]am, descendant of the eldest daughter of the mighty King Kurigalzu, (why) do I not sit on the throne of the land of Babylonia? I sent you a sincere proposal; you however have granted me no reply: you may climb up to heaven – [but I’ll pull you down] by your hem; you may go down to the underworld – [but I’ll pull you up] by your hair! I shall destroy your cities, dem[olish] your fortresses, stop up your (irrigation) ditches, cut down your orchards, [pull out] the rings [of the sluices] at the mouths of your (irrigation) canals…
Shutruk Nahhunte, Letter to the Kassite court

Inscription of Shutruk-Nakhunte
on the captured stele of Naram-Sin

Meli-Sipak of Babylon was succeeded by Marduk-apla-iddina I. Sometimes this name is rendered as Merodach-Baladan I, in reference to a later king of the same name whose name was recorded as Merodach-Baladan in the Old Testament. His reign in the mid-1100’s BC saw the beginning of the end for the Kassite Dynasty. Due to the marriage alliance between the Kassite and Elamite royal houses, Shutruk-Nakhunte of Elam believed that he had a claim to the throne of Babylon and invaded to enforce his claim. The invasion probably happened under the reign of the next king of Babylon, Zababa-suma-iddina (who may have usurped the throne) and was the zenith of Elamite military power. Babylon was under attack by the king of Assyria (Ashur-Dan I) at the time and the Elamite forces demolished the Babylonian opposition. The last Kassite king, Enlil-Nadin-Ahe was captured and deported and Babylon was reduced to an Elamite province during the reign of Shutruk-Nakhunte and his son, Kutir-Nakhunte.

I am Shutruk-Nahhunte, king of Elam. The god Inshushinak gave me the order...The city of Sippur I defeated...I plundered the Stele of Naram-Sin and brought it back to Elam... The Stele of Meli-Šipak I plundered from [Kassite king] Karaindash and brought back to Elam...
Shutruk Nahhunte, Royal Inscription on a captured Babylonian artefact

His crimes were greater and his grievous sins worse than all his fathers had committed … like a deluge he laid low all the peoples of Akkad, and cast in ruins Babylon and all the noblest cities of sanctity.
Nabû-kudurri-usur I? , Poetic pseudo-autobiographical text describing the king of Elam’s subjugation of Babylon

The Elamites seem to have tried to govern Babylonia as a province but a new dynasty based in Isin (referred to as the 2nd Dynasty of Isin) fought back and may have preserved southern Babylonia from the Elamite invasion. Around 1130BC one of the kings of this dynasty, Itti-Marduk-balatu may have been able to recapture the city of Babylon and begin to stabilise the country.

Mutakkil-Nusku, his brother, fought him and took him to Karduniaš (Babylon). Mutakkil-Nusku held the throne briefly, then died.
Assyrian King List

Around this time Ashur-Dan I still reigned in Assyria, however the succession of his sons proved problematic, with the crown prince being deposed shortly after coronation by his brother who usurped the throne. The usurper was unable to survive long, with a resurgent Babylonia putting pressure on Assyria. He was succeeded by his son, Ashur-resh-ishi I. At this time “Ahlamu” or Aramean tribesmen begin to attack Mesopotamia from the west, although they do not seem to have been successful.

In Babylon, Nabu-kudurri-usur I came to the throne. He is sometimes referred to as Nebuchadnezzar I, as a later king with a similar name is mentioned extensively in the Old Testament and “Nebuchadnezzar” is the Hebrew form of this name. His reign saw the height of Babylonian power for the 2nd Dynasty of Isin. In revenge for the Elamite attack on Babylon that had destroyed the Kassites, he marched on Elam and heavily defeated them. This broke the power of the Shutrukid Dynasty of Elam and would safeguard Mesopotamia from the east for many years. The statue of Marduk was returned to Babylon along with a host of other items looted by the Elamites and the royal propagandists wrote literature to enshrine the victory for future generations.

To the north, Nabu-kudurri-usur I was less successful, with the Assyrian king Ashur-resh-ishi I claiming victory in a series of sieges and battles. Assyrian power was rising again and when Enlil-nadin-apli (the son of Nabu-kudurri-usur I) succeeded to the throne he was decisively defeated by the Assyrians and a rebellion launched against him by his uncle, Marduk-nadin-ahhe.

Enlil-nadin-apli, son of Nebuchadnezzar, marched on Aššur to conquer it. Marduk-nadin-ahhe, brother of Nebuchadnezzar, and the nobles rebelled against him and Enlil-nadin-apli returned to his land, his city. They killed him with the sword.
Walker Chronicle

Tigalth-Pileser I

In the early 1000’s BC Marduk-nadin-ahhe was an able king of Babylon who had the misfortune to reign at the same time as a powerful king of Assyria, Tiglath-Pileser I. Tiglath-Pileser I attacked in all directions from the Assyrian heartlands, defeating the Babylonians (albeit, not decisively), pushing northwards into the mountainous regions later known as Urartu and most impressively, as far as the Mediterranean sea to the west. Despite these successes, the Aramean tribesmen were becoming a severe problem with the Assyrian king having to launch campaign after campaign against the tribes. These campaigns were deemed successful in the inscriptions and they may well have been local successes but the decentralised tribes were hard to defeat.

...the people ate one another's flesh to save their lives. Like a flood's ravaging water the Aramaean "houses" increased, plundered the crops of Assyria, conquered and took many fortified cities of Assyria. People fled toward the mountains of Habruri to save their lives. The Aramaeans took their gold, their silver, and their possessions. Marduk-nadin-ahhe, king of Karduniaš, died. Marduk-šapik-zeri entered upon his father's throne. Eighteen years of reign of Marduk-nadin-ahhe.
... all the harvest of Assyria was ruined. The Aramaean tribes increased and seized the bank of the Tigris. They plundered [...] Idu, the district of Nineveh, Kilizi. In that year, Tiglath-pileser I, king of Assyria, marched to Katmuhu.
Inscription of Tiglath-Pileser I describing campaigns against the Arameans.

Tiglath-Pileser I died around 1075BC and his sons fought among themselves over the succession, with Shamshi-Adad IV eventually taking the throne around 1055BC. During this time the Babylonians enjoyed a period of relative peace for about twenty years until the reign of Adad-apla-iddina. The disputes in Assyria suited the kings in Babylon and they seem to have assisted some of the usurpers who fought for the throne. However, the Aramean tribesmen now began to attack Babylonia as well as Assyria. Both Assyria and Babylonia had dynastic struggles and internal strife and some usurpers may have tried to enlist the help of the invaders.

The next twenty years would see the sources from the Babylonian kingdom go dark, with even some of the names of the kings being unknown. In Assyria, Ashurnasirpal I and Shalmaneser II reigned during this time and managed to hold off the Aramean incursions, barely. After Shalmaneser II there was further struggles over the succession with Ashur-Rabi II eventually taking the throne near the end of the 1000’s BC. During this time the Aramean invaders had managed to establish permanent settlements on the eastern side of the Euphrates River, eroding Assyrian control in the region.

The rulers of Babylonia were not so fortunate. Their kingdom was overrun and the 2nd Dynasty of Isin came to an end around 1020BC, with the southern part of their kingdom being taken by a new dynasty referred to as the second Sealand Dynasty. This dynasty was unstable, with the first king being recorded as dying by the sword and the entire dynasty only lasting slightly over two decades.

The warrior, resident of the Sealand, Simbar-šihu, son of Eriba-Sin, soldier of the dynasty of Damiq-ilišu, was slain with the sword. He ruled for seventeen years. He was buried in the palace of Sargon. Ea-mukin-zeri, the usurper, son of Hašmar, ruled for three months. He was buried in the swamp of Bit-Hašmar. Kaššu-nadin-ahhe, son of Sappaya, ruled for three years. In the palace of [...] he was buried. Three kings of the dynasty of the Sealand ruled for twenty-three years.
Dynastic Chronicle, describing the second Sealand Dynasty

A new dynasty arose in Babylonia around this time, known as the Bit-Bazi Dynasty (meaning the House of Bazi, being an Akkadian version of a Kassite clan name). Around the year 1000BC, Elam had virtually disappeared from history with no records at this time, although it is probable that there were kings of Elam at this time. Unfortunately Elamite inscriptions are few and the language is not well understood in comparison to Akkadian. Nearly all the records of their kings are known from their enemies who were themselves in decline at this time. Assyria and Babylon were reeling from invasions of Aramean tribes and internal dynastic struggles. While their civilisations had not collapsed like the Hittites the events of the Bronze Age Collapse had affected them. The breakdown of the empires of the west meant that the Aramean tribes could roam freely whereas previously the Hittites and Egyptians would have fought them. The cascading effect of tribal migrations devastated Mesopotamia.

In Mesopotamia the Assyrians and Babylonians had been locked in a seesaw struggle for supremacy since the late Bronze Age with the Assyrians gradually gaining the upper hand. This would set the stage for centuries of conflict between Asshur and Babylon that would continue until 612BC. During this period, chariots were gradually becoming less important on the battlefield and the use of iron became increasingly widespread, although bronze-working continued to be important.

Sarcophagus of Ahiram from Byblos

The most important development however, was the relative independence of Syro-Palestine during this period. This was an area that had previously been dominated by large empires but was now relatively free of outside influence. Egypt did not march northwards in strength past Sinai since Ramesses III and apart from Tiglath-Pileser I it seems no Assyrian king pushed as far as the Mediterranean in Syria. Tribal migrations swept through the region but nevertheless new city-states and kingdoms arose in the region. The Phoenician cities were able to thrive as were the coastal Philistine cities such as Gaza and Ashdod. It is probably at this point that the Israelite kingdom/kingdoms were established, as well as kingdoms such as Moab, Ammon and the Aramean kingdom of Damascus. However, while we know that there was a great deal of activity in the region, particularly along the coasts, it is hard to speak about it in great detail based on the written archaeological evidence.

Detail from the sarcophagus of Ahiram

Part of the reason for this is that the empires such as Egypt and Assyria did not leave good records at this time. Their scope was limited by their internal weakness so their records of events beyond their borders are poor. But the more interesting reason for our lack of knowledge stems from a new technology. At this time cuneiform was beginning to be replaced in Syro-Palestine by an alphabetic script (that probably had its origins in Egypt but which was systematised by the Phoenicians for use in Western Semitic languages). This script did not require clay tablets and could instead be written on papyrus, animal skins or linen paper, neither of which would survive for long in the climate of the region but which greatly simplified the creation and storage of records and literature. We have a few fragments of the writing from Phoenician inscriptions and pottery shards known as ostraca but most of the records of this period have simply been destroyed by time. It was an unfortunate case where an advancement of technology actually made the era a dark age for the historian.

A coffin made it [It]tobaal, son of Ahirom, king of Byblos, for Ahirom, his father, lo, thus he put him in seclusion. Now, if a king among kings and a governor among governors and a commander of an army should come up against Byblos; and when he then uncovers this coffin – (then:) may strip off the sceptre of his judiciary, may be overturned the throne of his kingdom, and peace and quiet may flee from Byblos.
An inscription from the Ahiram Sarcophagus of Ahiram, ruler of Byblos, c. 1000BC. It is the oldest known alphabetic writing in Phoenician.

Related Blog Posts:
The Bronze Age Collapse: I (c. 1200BC)
The Bronze Age Collapse: II (c. 1200BC)
The Bronze Age Collapse: III (c. 1200BC)
The Early Iron Age and the Death of Kings: I (c.1200-1000BC)
The Early Iron Age and the Death of Kings: II (c.1200-1000BC)
The 10th Century BC (c.1000-900BC)

The Early Iron Age and the Death of Kings: Part I

This blog post is about the aftermath of the Bronze Age Collapse. I have written fairly extensively about the Late Bronze Age in the Middle East, with articles on the period as a whole, on the Mitanni and the Pharaoh Akhenaten in particular. At some point I may write some dedicated articles on Hittite history, the Kassites, the Battle of Kadesh and other interesting topics, as there is a wealth of material on this period. But in case the reader is tired of hearing of the Late Bronze Age I’m going to try to advance the narrative in the meantime and move on to the early Iron Age, in my very slow, very haphazard, piecemeal history of the world. I will not give absolute dates, as dating in this era is not entirely agreed upon and many of the kings mentioned have multiple names. I will use the most common English names for the kings and/or call out where my usage differs.

Many of the quotations given here are taken from the very interesting reshafim.org site which can be found here. A lot of enjoyable reads have been posted on this site.

In the Bronze Age Collapse, the civilisations collapsed at a different rate and to a different extent. The collapse was the worst in the west, with Mycenaean Greece falling utterly. Its settlements were abandoned and its writing system forgotten. The Hittites were destroyed but a small remnant survived in Syria. Egypt, Assyria and Babylon survived but were weakened. Elam appears to have actually grown stronger. I will try to give the history of roughly 1200-1000BC, moving from west to east (in a geographically confused fashion).

A later Greek depiction of Heracles

Around 1200BC the Mycenaean cities and palaces were burned. Some time may have elapsed between the burnings but textual evidence is non-existent and carbon dating is unable to provide great precision. Eventually some of the citadels were reoccupied and may have even flourished briefly before the final abandonment. The relatively unimportant citadel of Athens appears to not have been destroyed. Possibly it was overlooked, but it is more likely that they collaborated in the destruction. There is a legend that the sons of Heracles (Hercules) were expelled from the Peloponnese (where Mycenaean power was strongest) and stayed at Athens before returning generations later to attack the king of Mycenae.

If there is any truth to this legend it would suggest that the invaders may have been part of a civil war and that the inhabitants of Attica were on good terms with the invaders. However, this is to read a great deal into myth. Myth is fascinating, but we do have to be cautious. There are so many (quite wonderful) Greek myths, that it is possible to make all sorts of theories and selectively use myth to create elaborate justifications for them.

Building from the Iron Age in Lefkandi

For whatever reason, Attica was spared the general destruction, as were the islands. There was a migration from the Peloponnese to the islands of Euboea and elsewhere in the Aegean. Greek speakers began to colonise the western coast of Asia Minor over the next few hundred years, ringing the Aegean with Greek speaking settlements. Many of these settlements spoke an Ionic dialect, which they shared with Attica, but few other places on the mainland. The Peloponnese spoke a Doric dialect of Greek with the notable exception of the highlands of Arcadia to the north. Again, people have made a great deal of this, treating the Ionic speakers as fugitives from the old Mycenaean kingdom and the Doric speakers as the descendants of the invaders, but the situation is almost certainly more complicated. In history, things are always complicated.

Almost nothing of note would be created in Greece for the two hundred years under discussion. However, pottery styles changed from the Mycenaean styles to a variety of localised styles and iron weapons became widespread throughout the region. On the island of Euboea, a town now known as Lefkandi has some buildings dating from slightly after this period, with the main structure of the small settlement being a large ritual building with a major burial there. There were later burials in the vicinity and it is speculated that this was a “heroon”, meaning the tomb of a hero. Perhaps this was a community’s way of commemorating a great warrior leader who was reverenced by his community after his passing and whose remains were the focus of his community. The size of the structure compared to the settlement suggests that the towns of this time were quite isolated and were controlled by single rulers. Apart from this, there is not much that can really be said for Greece at this period. The fall had been total, but the subsequent rise in centuries to come was to be dazzling.

And all of the cities of the land of Carchemish, Murmurik, Shipri, Mazuwati and Šurun – these fortified cities– I gave to my son (Piyassili).
Detail from the Suppililiuma-Shattiwazza treaty telling of the creation of the Hittite viceroy in Carchemish

Hittite relief from Carchemish

The Hittite collapse was vicious also but not quite as complete as in Mycenae. After Suppiluliuma I had captured Carchemish (a major city on the Euphrates in Syria) from the Mitanni, there had been a powerful viceroy set up in the city to rule as a deputy and representative of the royal house. The deputy was Piyassili, a son of the king Suppiluliuma and he was treated as a de facto minor king in his own right, with his descendants succeeding to his throne. When the last king of the Hittites (Suppiluliuma II) disappears from history, Talmi-Teshub was ruling in Carchemish. His son, Kuzi-Teshub, proclaimed himself as a Great King upon his succession. The main Hittite Empire was no more but many refugees must have fled to the southern cities and for a time the empire survived in a truncated form in Carchemish. Another important state, Milid, survived. Initially it was dependent on Carchemish but soon it, like other cities, became independent and became a flourishing centre in its own right. The site is known today as Arslantepe.

Hittite reliefs from Carchemish

How Hittite these kingdoms really were is subject to interpretation. The main Hittite dialect was almost extinct and nearly all the inscriptions are in Luwian, a related Indo-European language. The native inhabitants of the region spoke Semitic tongues, particularly Aramaic; the language of the new tribesmen that had moved into the region. Carchemish had no ability to hold an empire together so a group of states that are referred to as Neo-Hittite formed a loose confederation in the north of Syria. These survived and kept the Hittite legacy alive until they were crushed by the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the eighth and ninth centuries.

Ramesses III had stemmed the worst of the assault on Egypt. The Sea Peoples had been defeated in the Battle of the Delta and even though Egyptian influence was now minimal in its old Syro-Palestinian empire, the Egyptians still controlled Sinai. However, despite Ramesses III’s claims to have saved Egypt and his magnificent temple building, unrest seems to have grown in the later years of his reign. There are records of food shortages, workers strikes and increases in the price of bread.

The stresses of this turbulent period may have fostered dissent. Possibly the dissent had nothing to do with external pressures and was simply the result of palace intrigue but for whatever reason, a conspiracy against the Pharaoh was hatched. Tiye, a wife of the Pharaoh, appears to have wanted her son Pentawer to inherit the throne. A host of accomplices who used black magic to subvert the guards’ defences attacked the king at night while he was in Thebes in Upper Egypt to celebrate the Heb Sed ritual. According to some documents the Pharaoh may have initially survived an attack by poison before expiring later. Modern analysis of the embalmed body of the Pharaoh tells a different story. Hidden under thick bandages, analysis showed that a deep cut had been made to the throat of the king; a cut that could not have been survived for more than minutes. Perhaps it was a mercy killing, perhaps a second conspiracy or perhaps our readings of the documents were simply wrong.

He arrived at the side of the harem, this other large, deep place. He began to make people of wax, inscribed, in order that they might be taken in by the inspector, Errem, [hindering] one troop and bewitching the others, that a few words might be taken in, and others brought out. Now, when he was examined concerning them, truth was found in every crime and in every evil (deed), which his heart had devised to do. There was truth therein, he had done them all, together with the other great criminals, the abomination of every god and every goddess all together. The great punishments of death were executed upon him, of which the gods have said: "Execute them upon him.
Lee Papyrus, describing the magic rituals used by the conspirators to assist in their assassination attempt

The mummy of Ramesses III
with heavy bandaging on the neck

 The conspirators were caught by the favoured heir, Ramesses IV, who allowed judges to examine and pass judgement upon the conspirators. The high ranked Prince Pentawer, who was to have become Pharaoh, was allowed to kill himself, allowing him to enter the afterlife in disgrace. The lower ranked conspirators were probably burned alive, thus denying them entry to the afterlife in any form; a terrible punishment designed to destroy in both this life and the next. The fate of Queen Tiye, the instigator of the conspiracy, is unknown.

Ramesses IV succeeded to the throne in 1155 and reigned over a diminishing kingdom. Ramesses IV was perhaps the last Pharaoh of this dynasty to have led expeditions into the Sinai Desert (Ramesses VI may have been to Megiddo but the evidence is unclear). Beyond the Sinai Egyptian power was minimal. Monuments were built on an epic scale but the priesthood of Amun (the god of Thebes who was given prominence during the New Kingdom, when many of the dynasties were based in Thebes) was becoming a force that would rival the monarchy. The priesthood controlled large tracts of land and had considerable incomes. When the monarchy was focused on the north, on Lower Egypt, then the priesthood could act autonomously in the south. During the reign of Ramesses V there were attacks by Libyan raiders and increasing fortifications were made for the temples of Thebes, showing that the state was becoming increasingly unstable. Ramesses V may have been overthrown by his brother, who reigned as Ramesses VI. Ramesses VII and Ramesses VIII are not well known but grain prices increased during their reigns.

Ramesses IV

These are the tombs and sepulchres in which the nobles, the […], the Theban women, and the people of the land rest, on the west of the city; it was found that the thieves had broken into them all, that they had pulled out their occupants from their coverings and coffins, they (the occupants) being thrown upon the ground; and that they had stolen their articles of house-furniture, which had been given them, together with the gold, the silver, and the ornaments which were in their coverings.
The Abbot Papyrus giving an investigation into the tomb robberies in the time of Ramesses IX

During the reign of Ramesses IX it was found that there had been a spate of tomb robberies in the Valley of the Kings, with many of even the royal tombs opened and plundered. The mayor of Thebes was implicated but not convicted. It was a sign that royal authority and the rule of law itself was becoming weak. The graves were supposedly protected by curses and spells and the desperation that would lead the thieves to risk disturbing the royal dead cannot have augured well for the dynasty.

Then the High Priest of Amun, Menkheperre, triumphant, went to the great god, saying: "As for any person, of whom they shall report before thee, saying, `A slayer of living people … (is he); thou shalt destroy him, thou shalt slay him." Then the great god nodded exceedingly, exceedingly.
The Banishment Stele, telling of the High Priest of Thebes punishing rebels who had attacked the temple. In ancient Egypt statues were sometimes moved by priests to show the god assenting to the verdict.

The threat of Libyan raiders was still present during the reign of Ramesses X, with workers on the royal tombs neglecting their work for fear of attack. During the reign of Ramesses XI, the last king of the Twentieth Dynasty, the effective power seems to have been in the hands of Piankh, the High Priest of Amun. The Pharaoh died leaving no successor and was buried by Smendes, who claimed the title of Pharaoh. Smendes only really ruled Lower Egypt, with his capital being based at Tanis. However, the Pharaoh made no attempt to try and wrest back control of Upper Egypt from the priests, probably recognising that his own power base was weak.

Magnificent death mask of Psusennes I

Smendes was succeeded by Amenenmisu, who is almost invisible to history before being succeeded by Psusennes I. Psusennes reigned for over thirty years and married the daughter of the High Priest of Thebes, uniting the two ruling families of Egypt. His burial goods have been discovered and are truly spectacular despite the weak state of Egypt at the time. It has been discovered how the Pharaohs of the Twenty-First Dynasty were able to bury themselves in such splendour. Previously the robbery of tombs had been done by corrupt officials and desperate guards and workmen; now it was being carried out by kings; papering over the poverty of their state by stealing from those who had reigned before them.

This blog post is rather long so I will split the narrative here and speak of the Assyrian, Babylonian and Elamite civilisations in a following post.

Related Blog Posts:
The Bronze Age Collapse: I (c. 1200BC)
The Bronze Age Collapse: II (c. 1200BC)
The Bronze Age Collapse: III (c. 1200BC)
The Early Iron Age and the Death of Kings: I (c.1200-1000BC)
The Early Iron Age and the Death of Kings: II (c.1200-1000BC)
The 10th Century BC (c.1000-900BC)

The Mitanni

Map of the Middle East in 1400 showing Mitanni kingdom

After the fall of Babylon to the Hittites, centralised power in Mesopotamia declined. Mursilis I, the king of the Hittites was assassinated and his successors did not consolidate his conquests. The Assyrian kings controlled the area around Asshur but were too weak to conquer areas far from their city. The Kassite tribes established themselves in Babylon but were engaged in subduing opposition from the southern dynasty of the Sealand kingdom (when Sealand was an actual kingdom and not a vanity micro-state off the coast of Britain). The Egyptians had not yet extended their empire into Palestine and would not establish true power in the region until after Tuthmosis I raided as far as the Euphrates around 1500BC. This left a power vacuum in what is now Syria, with isolated cities and tribes scattered across the plains of the Euphrates and Khabur rivers.

Into this vacuum came the Mitanni, whose kingdom was also referred to as Khanigalbat. They are (to me at least) the most mysterious of the ancient empires. They left few marks on the landscape: no gigantic buildings; no works of art. There are in fact few physical traces of their existence. However for a short period they were able to contend with the greatest powers of the era, clashing with the Egyptians, Babylonians, Hittites and Assyrians before eventually disappearing.

Egyptian chariot with light-spoked wheels of the period

Thus speaks Kikkuli, master horse trainer of the land of Mitanni
Manual on Training Horses, excavated from Khattusha

Warfare in the region changed around this time. Earlier civilisations, such as the Sumerians, had used chariots, but their chariots were more like war-carts or war-wains. They had four heavy, solid wheels and were pulled by onagers or donkeys. These Sumerian “chariots” would have functioned as mobile battle platforms for archers and spear throwers if they were used in battle at all. With the onset of the Late Bronze Age the great powers began to use war horses to pull chariots that had two spoked, ultra-thin wheels; that could travel at great speeds, whirling elite troops from one side of the battle to the other, wheeling and firing barrages of arrows and charging down infantry as needed. It is unclear if the Mitanni were the innovators in this regard (I suspect that they were not, as the Hittites were also known as charioteers), but they were adept at the new style of warfare. The late Bronze Age was the golden age of chariot warfare, with Egyptians, Assyrians, Hittites, Mycenaeans and Mitanni all fielding elite units. After the Bronze Age Collapse chariots continued to be used but cavalry was favoured, as being more adaptable.

A fascinating series of texts were excavated from Khattusha, the capital of the Hittite Empire, known as the Hittite horse texts. One of these is a copy of a text from the 1500’s BC, written by Kikkuli the Mitannian, which was preserved and recorded by the Hittite scribes, probably as a manual for training chariot horses for war. Many people have taken this to be a sign that the Mitanni invented or transmitted the secrets of chariotry to the region. However, all it proves is that there was at least one person from the Mitanni state who was deemed an expert.

Teshub, lord of heaven and earth, Sin and Shamash, lords of heaven and earth, Teshub, lord of Kurinni of Kapa, Nergal of Kurta, Teshub, lord of Uhushuman, Ea-sharri, lord of wisdom, Anu, Antum, Enlil and Ninlil, the gods Mitrashshil, the gods Uruwan- ashshil, the god Indar, the gods Nashatianna, Ellatsha, Shamanmin- uhi, Teshub, lord of Washshukkani, Teshub, lord of all of Irrite, Partahi of Shuta, Nabarwa, Shuruhi, Ashur, the star, Shala, Nin-egal, Dam- kina, Ishhara, the mountains and the rivers, the gods of heaven and the gods of earth, by the words of this treaty may they stand, and may they give ear. For they are the witnesses.
Treaty between Suppiluliuma I, King of the Hittites and Shattiwaza, King of the Mitanni showing Indo-European god names (Indar similar to Indra) amid the Mesopotamian and Hurrian gods called to witness the treaty

Amarna Letter

Linguistically the Mitanni kingdom is very interesting. The main population spoke a language called Hurrian, which is only related to one other language (Urartian), which makes their language fascinating in its own right. Some linguists have suggested that Hurrian is the basis that Tolkien used in creating the Black Speech of Mordor, as certain structures appear to be similar between the languages and Tolkien would certainly have been familiar with the recent translations of Hurrian.This is speculation however and was never confirmed in writing by Tolkien.

However, their ruling class seems to have had names that used a different language, a very antiquated form of Indo-Aryan, (referred to in academia (and Wikipedia) as the Indo-Aryan superstrate in Mitanni). It is unlikely that at the time of the Mitanni Empire that the rulers actually spoke this Indo-Aryan tongue but they preserved a number of words (particularly those relating to horses and gods) that used this language, rather like how fragments of Latin have survived in academic and legal use in English. Like the other societies of the time the Mitanni were fairly ecumenical with their gods and worshipped the gods of Mesopotamia, as well as the Hurrian gods but the ruling classes do seem to have retained a few of the gods of the Indo-European pantheon as well.

It’s easy to get overly carried away with speculations about what the Indo-Aryan words in Mitanni mean for linguistics and theories about where the Indo-European language originated. But it must be borne in mind that the Mitanni sources are very scarce. Nearly everything recorded of them comes from their neighbours who may have garbled the transmission. Until more information comes to light it would be best to withhold opinion.

In the early 1400’s BC the Mitanni were ruled by Shuttarna who had built a strong kingdom near the Khabur River. His son Parshatatar extended the kingdom significantly, taking Aleppo, controlling south-west Anatolia (known as Kizzuwatna) and raiding as far in the other direction to the east. Parshatatar may have fought with the Egyptian Pharaoh Tuthmosis I who led a raiding expedition as far as the Euphrates, although I think it more likely that the clash took place in the reign of Shuttarna. Oddly, as the Egyptians had never seen a major river that flowed southwards, they referred to the river found on this expedition as the river that flows backwards (Herodotus later said the same thing about the Nile in reverse). The clash between the Mitanni and the Egyptians was the first time Egypt had met another empire that could match it in combat (the Hyksos had invaded from outside Egypt and conquered it, but the Hyksos had never been part of an empire). The clash between the two powers augured badly. At this point the Mitanni would have been stronger than the Hittites, Assyrians or Babylonians, but would not have expected an attack from the south.

Tuthmosis I had raided as far as the Euphrates and even crossed it in a symbolic gesture, but there had been no pitched battles or major engagements between the two powers and the cities that had supposedly were conquered by the Egyptians stopped acknowledging supremacy as soon as the armies were removed. His grandson Tuthmosis III would change this. Early in his reign he realised that the Canaanite kings were preparing to withstand Egypt. They were led by someone from Kadesh, a strategic city in southern Syria that was within the sphere of Mitanni influence. After winning a decisive victory against the Canaanite alliance at Megiddo, Tuthmosis received gifts from the kings of the Middle East, except the Mitanni.

Modern drawing of the Seal of Shaushtatar

"Year 23, first month of summer, day 16, (arrival) at the town of Yehem. His majesty ordered a consultation with his valiant army, saying: "That wretched foe of Kadesh has come and entered into Megiddo and is there at this moment. He has gathered to him the princes of all the foreign lands that had been loyal to Egypt, as well as those from as far as Nahrin, consisting of ---, Khor and Kedy, their horses, their armies, their people. And he says--it is reported--'I shall wait and fight his majesty here in Megiddo....'" 
Inscription of Tuthmosis III from the temple at Karnak describing the alliance that fought him at the Battle of Megiddo.

The Mitanni were not expecting an attack as their border cities were still untouched and the Pharaoh had no way of transporting a large army across the Euphrates. Tuthmosis III is sometimes called the Egyptian Napoleon but the Egyptian Hannibal would be appropriate as well. As at Megiddo, where Tuthmosis III had used forced marching over difficult terrain to gain tactical advantage over the Canaanites, he now stole a march on the Mitanni. Raiding a coastal city he captured a large amount of boats which he transported overland as part of his army before rapidly bypassing and capturing the cities between him and the Euphrates. Once across the River, with the Mitanni army unready for war, Tuthmosis III plundered wherever he pleased before retreating with large quantities of spoil.We must of course remember that these events are described only from Egyptian sources. Tuthmosis III was undoubtedly a great general but the Egyptian Pharaohs had a penchant for describing every battle as a great victory, even if it was a tactical or strategic defeat.

And my Majesty sailed to the northern border of Asia. My Majesty ordered that many ships be built of cedar from the mountains of God's Land in the neighbourhood of the Mistress of Byblos. They were placed on wagons towed by bulls. They travelled ahead of my Majesty to ferry across that river that is between this foreign land and Naharin - a king to be boasted of because of his two arms in melee, and who crossed the Euphrates after them who had attacked him, as the first of his army while seeking that miserable enemy in the foreign lands of Mitanni, while he fled for fear before His Majesty to another land, a far place.
Then my Majesty established my stele on that mountain of Naharin, as one extracted from the mountain on the western side of the Euphrates.
Napata Stele of Tuthmosis III describing the campaign against the Mitanni 

The probable king of the Mitanni at this period was Shaushtatar, who seems to have been a great general. He had attacked the city of Asshur and carried away the great ceremonial gates of the city, reducing Assyria to a mere vassal state. When Tuthmosis III had surprised the Mitanni before, the armies may have been engaged to the east. Now awakened to the danger, the Mitanni garrisoned the west of their empire properly and further campaigns by Tuthmosis III in the region proved fruitless, with one “great victory” earning a paltry ten prisoners as captives. Tuthmosis III died and Shaushtatar now prepared for war to carry the battle to the Egyptians, before dying himself.

Amarna Letter from Tushratta

Instead of the expected clash of superpowers something unexpected happened. Peace broke out. Amenhotep II of Egypt does not seem to have campaigned in Syria and his son, Tuthmosis IV and Artatama I of Mitanni made a peace treaty that included marriage alliances and Mitanni princesses becoming part of the Egyptian royal family. The two empires corresponded and their rulers addressed each other as “brother”. It was the beginning of the Bronze Age diplomacy that became famous with the discovery of the Amarna Letters. At this period the Hittites were beginning to threaten Mitanni again but the establishment of peace between Egypt and the Mitanni allowed the Mitanni kingdom to reach the height of its power under Shuttarna I.

... he asked for the daughter of my grandfather, the sister of my father. He wrote 5, 6 times, but he did not give her. When he wrote my grandfather 7 times, then only under such pressure, did he give her
Letter from Tushratta of Mitanni to Akhenaten of Egypt describing the marriage alliance between their royal houses.  

The prosperity of the Mitanni kingdom was short-lived. Shuttarna I was murdered and after a power struggle his son Tushratta was able to kill the murderer, his brother Artashumara. Tushratta was to be the last of the Great Kings of the Mitanni. He was a contemporary of the heretic Pharaoh Akhenaten of Egypt, to whom he was related by marriage, and also contemporary with the greatest general of all the Hittite kings, Suppiluliuma I. In the chaos after the murder of Shuttarna, another Mitanni king, Artatama, had set up a rival kingdom. Suppiluliuma I supported Artatama and attacked the Mitanni three times, at one point apparently forcing Tushratta to abandon his capital.

You are the one who knows the words of Mimmuriya, your husband, but you have not sent me yet the gift of homage which Mimmuriya, your husband, has ordered to be sent to me. I have asked Mimmuriya, your husband, for massive gold statues ... But your son has sent gold-plated statues of wood. As the gold is like dust in the country of your son, why have they been the reason for such pain, that your son should not have given them to me? ... Neither has he given me what his father had been accustomed to give.
Letter from Tushratta, King of the Mitanni to Tiye (Queen Mother of Egypt and mother of Akhenaten)

Map of Middle East showing Khanigalbat (Mitanni)
being squeezed between Assyria and the Hittites

To make matters worse for the beleaguered empire, the Assyrians had cast off the Mitanni yoke and were supporting factions in the warring empire. In the face of these wars Tushratta fought back and won some successes but the armies of the Hittites were relentless. Tushratta sent a series of letters to Akhenaten asking for large quantities of gold. After the continual wars and Hittite conquests the Mitanni finances were probably not good. No help came from the Egyptians, who were involved in religious reforms and appeared unable to even control their vassals in Palestine and southern Syria. As later civilisations in Syria and Palestine would learn, Egypt was powerful but not necessarily a reliable ally. Tushratta was murdered, possibly by his brothers but probably by his sons, as Suppiluliuma I took the vital city of Carchemish on the Euphrates cutting the Mitanni off from their rich tribute cities on the Syrian coast.

A confused series of events follows, with Artatama II and Shuttarna III ruling as quick usurpers from within the royal family. Shuttarna III returned the great doors of Asshur to the Assyrians and called in Assyrian aid against the Hittites and his enemies within his family. The Assyrians came but ended up attacking the Mitanni capital before Suppiluliuma I attacked both forces and installed Shattiwaza, the brother of Tushratta, on the throne. Shattiwaza was installed, not as a Great King, who could address the Pharaoh of Egypt as an equal, but as a vassal of the Great King of the Hittites. At this point all the satellite states of the Mitanni had been lost to the Hittites and the Assyrians, leaving only the heartland remaining. The Kassite Babylonians were claiming that Asshur was their vassal city, but the Assyrians were determined to be recognised as Great Kings in their own right.

Akhenaten: contemporary of Tushratta
and Suppiluliuma

Shattuara was installed as king of the Mitanni by the Assyrians but rebelled. His son Wasashatta also rebelled against the Assyrians and his revolt was ruthlessly crushed by Adad-Nirari I of Assyria. While Wasashatta may have escaped, the rest of the Mitanni royal family were captured and taken to Asshur. Their fate was probably not pleasant.

You continue to speak about [the defeat] of Wasa[shatta and the conquest?] of the land of Hurri. You indeed conquered by force of arms. And you conquered […] and have become a Great King. But why do you still continue to speak about brotherhood and about seeing Mount Amanus? What is this, brotherhood? And what is this, seeing Mount Amanus? For what reason should I write to you about brotherhood? Who customarily writes to someone about brotherhood? Do those who are not on good terms customarily write to one another about brotherhood? On what account should I write to you about brotherhood? Were you and I born from one mother? As [my grandfather] and my father did not write to the King of Assyria [about brotherhood], you shall not keep writing to me [about brotherhood] and Great Kingship. [It is not my] wish.
Letter from Mursilis II of the Hittites to Adad-Nirari I of the Assyrians

Mursilis II of the Hittites still treated the Assyrians as arrogant upstarts, possibly justified as Adad-Nirari I called himself not only a Great King but held the title King of the Four Corners (or King of the Universe). Mursilis II was overthrown by his uncle, the great general Hattusili III who had led the Hittite armies against Ramesses II at the Battle of Kadesh. Hattusili III acknowledged Adad-Nirari I as a Great King and corresponded with him respectfully concerning their borders which now lay near the Euphrates River. The rich coastal cities that had been subject to the Mitanni were now subject to the Hittites, who now had made peace with the Egyptians after their strategic victory/stalemate at Kadesh. The Mitanni heartlands were held by the rising power of Assyria and were incorporated into Assyria proper. The old capital of Washukanni had been abandoned and the new capital of Taite had been turned into a wilderness by Adad-Nirari.

To the Sun my father say: thus says the king of [Ha]nigalbat (Mitanni) your son.
 Pe[ace] be with the Sun my father.
I trust the Sun my father. As for me, I thus say, like my father, let the Sun say […]
What sin did I commit against my father? ...
If a man has two judges], the one comes forth and the other does not c[ome forth]. Now the king of Ashur my enemy has asked, and, in accordance (with the words) of Adad my lord, he acted.  The Sun, my father, heard.  I am living in the city Sinamu and Ehli-sarruma has sent his message to me. He wrote the following: [….]
Letter from a king of the Mitanni (probably Shattuara II) to a king of the Hittites (probably Hattusili III)

A stele possibly showing
Adad-Nirari I, a destroyer of the
Mitanni kingdom

There was possibly another Mitanni king, Shattuara II who was in the dangerous situation of ruling almost nothing and yet being claimed as subject by two Great Kings. He seems to have written a letter to Hattusili III begging for assistance, writing as a powerless subject to a Great King. He was crushed by Adad-Nirari’s son, Shalmaneser I who was the first Assyrian king to practice deportations of conquered peoples. It is possible however that this episode was invented by Shalmaneser I after campaigns in the region, claiming the deeds of his father as his own. In any event, power held in the region was now held by Assyrian governors rather than Mitanni kings and thus the Mitanni disappear from history.

The Mitanni are not renowned in history. Their achievements are mainly depicted as negatives, recorded by their neighbours who were often enemies. They left no monuments or cities and little art; their language and substrate languages have vanished from the earth, leaving no literature or epics behind. We know that they were great charioteers and horsemen at a time when the chariot ruled the battlefield and horsemanship was vital to empires but we do not know if they were the developers of these techniques and technologies or if they simply excelled in the technologies of others.

One of the things that the Mitanni, or more strictly speaking, the Hurrians, left us is some of the earliest notated music, found in their tributary city of Ugarit near the Syrian coast. After thirty-three hundred years it still sounds, not bad at all. The video below gives an artists rendering of the Hymn known as Hurrian Hymn Six.

Their main legacy may be great power diplomacy. When the Mitanni and Egyptian kingdoms corresponded as respectful and powerful equals they laid the foundations for the diplomacy and trade of the Late Bronze Age, where Great Kings addressed each other as brother and tried to avoid confrontations. Diplomacy certainly predates the Mitanni but the idea of powerful kingdoms with smaller satellite states maintaining balance was new. Most diplomacy before this had simply been between city-states. Ironically the new diplomacy came into its own when the Mitanni had effectively been removed from the scene.

Even if we allow them a pivotal role in the development of Late Bronze Age diplomacy the Mitanni are still largely silent. But this may not always be the case. We know that they had at least two capitals; Washukanni and, at later periods, Taite. These have never been found but we do know that they lie somewhere near the Khabur River in Syria. There may well be archives of letters and literature lying beneath the ancient mounds that will one tell the tales of this empire to the world.

At present this land is controlled by Daesh, (or IS/ISIS/ISIL) who are barbarically destroying the heritage of the region. Even the items that they do not destroy but sell on the black market are a blow to humanity, as a looted item has no context and has lost most of its historical value. I hope that one day the cities of the Mitanni are discovered but while the thuggish barbarians still roam the land, wrecking the treasures they do not understand, perhaps it is best that they stay hidden.

Related Blog Posts:
The Time of the Amorites: I
The Time of the Amorites: II
The Late Bronze Age in the Middle East
The Collapse of the Bronze Age: I
The Collapse of the Bronze Age: II
The Collapse of the Bronze Age: III

Making history

Pluto and Charon

Happy Bastille Day!

This is a blog about ancient history, but it is important to remember that we live in an era where history is being made on a colossal scale on a daily basis. Today, humanity will, for the first time, have a spacecraft arrive at a dwarf planet nine billion miles away. Despite the fact that the spacecraft was the fastest object ever to be launched it has taken nine years to traverse the oceans of space and reach its goal. It is the first trans-Neptunian object to be visited by a spacecraft and the information that it will give us about the Solar System will advance the cause of science.

In other news (yesterday), a new particle was possibly confirmed in the Large Hadron Collider. A possible penta-quark was observed and while the results are still to be reviewed, if this was to be deemed viable it would show a huge leap for science, from the very large to the very small.

History is a continuous process and we live in an exciting epoch.

The First Emperor Documentary

An impressive documentary on the First Emperor of China, who was mentioned previously in the post dealing with the Warring States.

I will hopefully be able to post another in-depth post in the not too distant future (possibly on the Mitanni?). In the meantime, enjoy.

The Time of the Amorites: Part II

The top of the stele of the Law Code of Hammurabi

Enki has esteemed him truly in the shrine, the august place -- the king who loves purification rites and is well-suited to the pure divine powers, the king who is skilled in the precious plans, who is reverent, eloquent and deft, the shepherd, favourite of Lord Nunamnir and beloved of Mother Ninlil, ......, who delights the great prince Enki, ......, who is cherished by holy Damgalnuna: the good shepherd Hammurabi.
Praise Hymn of Hammurabi

This is the second part of the post about the Amorite rulers and the period from the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur to the fall of the Old Babylonian Empire, from 2004BC to 1595BC (Middle Chronology). Please click here for the first post.

If the robber is not caught, then shall he who was robbed claim under oath the amount of his loss; then shall the community, and . . . on whose ground and territory and in whose domain it was compensate him for the goods stolen.
Law Code of Hammurabi: Article 23

Hammurabi is the king best known to posterity from this period. Other rulers, such as Shamshi-Adad, are not really remembered. But what has cemented Hammurabi’s legacy in contemporary thought is not the scale of his conquests but the famous law code that was discovered. This is a law code which emphasises the role of the ruler as shepherd of the people and intermediary between the people and the gods. It would appear to be much more violent than modern legal systems but allowances must be made for the fact that societies that have no facilities for imprisonment or police forces in the strict sense of the word nearly always have harsher laws. The standard legal procedure was what is known as lex talionis, best known from the Old Testament phrase “an eye for an eye.” The law code was far from unique; there are similar codes that predate and postdate it and share many features with it. However, as it was one of the first ones to be discovered by archaeology and because, despite its harshness, it still contains concepts such as the presumption of innocence, it has grabbed the imagination.

Figure from Larsa/Isin

And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations; That these made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar. All these were joined together in the vale of Siddim, which is the salt sea. Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in their mount Seir, unto Elparan, which is by the wilderness. And they returned, and came to Enmishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazezontamar. And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (the same is Zoar;) and they joined battle with them in the vale of Siddim; with Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and with Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings with five. And the vale of Siddim was full of slimepits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; and they that remained fled to the mountain. And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their victuals, and went their way.
Genesis 14:1-11 (King James Version translation)

The Law Code of Hammurabi stands as one of the prime exhibits of the Louvre in Paris and a bas-relief of Hammurabi adorns the US Congress buildings in recognition of his prowess as a lawmaker. Some people who are familiar with Genesis in the Old Testament may remember notes about Hammurabi in the story of Abraham. While certain scholars thought that Hammurabi might be mentioned in Genesis this is now thought to be unlikely. Shinar is the Hebrew name for the plains around Babylon and Amraphel sounds like it might possibly be a Hebrew version of Hammurabi’s name. The description of a powerful Elamite king with allies from the Mesopotamian plain is not unlike the situation of the early reign of Hammurabi but the names of the other kings and cities do not match well (no Chedorlaomer of Elam is known to history for example). Also, the five cities of the plain are usually located in the Dead Sea Valley and there is no record of Hammurabi or other Mesopotamian monarchs controlling or attacking these regions in this era. The archives of Mari and Ebla might shed more light on this but for the moment the identification has to be treated as very hypothetical at best. It is interesting however that tar pits are mentioned in the Genesis passage; considering Hammurabi’s obsession with bitumen in his disputes with Zimri-Lim.

The valiant Ninurta is your helper. In the E-kur, Nuska the august minister of Enlil, the assembly leader of all lands, is your foremost palace superintendent. Throughout your life, may you carry your neck high; in princely manner may you lift your head high! Prolong the days of his life for Samsu-iluna, of princely worth!
Praise Hymn of Samsu-iluna

Venus Tablet of Ammi-saduqa

After the death of Hammurabi his son Samsu-iluna succeeded him and the empire almost immediately began to disintegrate. A large rebellion saw the southern regions of old Sumer break away. A person named Rim-Sin, who was probably related to the Rim-Sin defeated by Hammurabi, united nearly all the old Sumerian cities in rebellion against Babylon. Samsu-iluna was victorious but at a heavy cost and he appears to have commanded his troops to be very destructive of the old cities of the south, tearing down walls and possibly killing the priests who kept the records. The records of the old Sumerian cities begin to become silent at this time. To the north and east the Elamites and the city of Asshur tried to gain independence but were fought off by Samsu-iluna who also fought off a raid by a people called the Kassites.

Abi-eshuh, son of Samsu-iluna, set out to conquer Iluma-ilu. He dammed the Tigris but did not capture Iluma-ilu.
Chronicle of the Early Kings

Samsu-iluna had held the empire together (barely) but his successor, Abi-eshuh, was unable to replicate the success. The south had broken away and a new dynasty (called the Sealand Dynasty) had arisen. Abi-eshuh appears to have tried an engineering solution to the problem, campaigning against the Sealand kings and trying to control the water flows. It is unclear what is being attempted. Did he try to use this as a way of entering cities via the water gates, as Cyrus was said to have done millennia later? Was he trying to create a reservoir that could be loosed against the enemy to drown them? It is unclear but the attempt failed.

Year 8: superior Venus vanishes E on Adar 27 and after 2 months 16 days appears W on Simanu 13
The Venus Tablet of Ammi-Saduqa

Ammi-Ditana succeeded Abi-Eshuh, reigning over a much reduced empire peacefully for a number of years. His son Ammi-Saduqa also reigned in relative peace. The main significance of Ammi-Saduqa’s reign to history is that during his reign certain observations of the planet Venus were made that can be matched against known astronomical data. Because the years of the king are known and those of his successors and predecessors are also recorded, this date should allow all of Mesopotamian history to be dated quite accurately. However, due to certain ambiguities and because astronomical planetary phenomena repeat themselves the dates may have three possible interpretations (up to 120 years apart). Most historians follow the Middle or the Low Chronology but High, Middle and Low all have their advocates and good historical rationales.

At the time of Samsuditana the Hittites marched against Akkad.
Ea-gamil, the king of the Sealand, fled to Elam. After he had gone, Ulam-Buriaš, brother of Kaštiliašu, the Kassite, mustered an army and conquered the Sealand. He was master of the land.
Chronicle of the Early Kings

Hittite chariot from later Bronze Age

Samsu-ditana was the last king of the Hammurabi’s Dynasty. An impressive raid by Mursilis I, King of the Hittites, overthrew Babylon in 1595BC (Middle Chronology). Mursilis was too far from his base in Anatolia to hold Babylon however so he retreated (being promptly assassinated upon his return). The Kassite tribes moved into the vacuum as the Amorite tribes had done previously and the later Bronze Age kings of Babylon would be Kassites.

This period of four hundred years, with the initial instability followed by the empire-building of Shamshi-Adad and Hammurabi and the empire maintained by Hammurabi’s successors saw a number of impressive building works and projects but most of these have succumbed to the ravages of time. If Abi-eshuh was even able to attempt to dam the Tigris this speaks to considerable technological prowess. But the main legacy is their obsession with writing. I find it unusual that records of ownership are given such priority in the Code of Hammurabi. As long distance trade could not have proper witnesses the clause mentioned above meant that practically every transaction required recording, a far larger task than could be handled merely by scribes. The trading class must have acquired the rudiments of reading and writing leading to very high literacy rates by ancient standards. It is in this fertile ground of a reading population that the standard text of the first recorded epic (The Epic of Gilgamesh) received its standard form.

Kassite kudurru boundary marker

The tavern-keeper spoke to Gilgamesh, saying:
"lf you are Gilgamesh, who killed the Guardian,
who destroyed Humbaba who lived in the Cedar Forest,
who slew lions in the mountain passes,
who grappled with the Bull that came down from heaven, and
killed him,
why are your cheeks emaciated, your expression desolate!
Why is your heart so wretched, your features so haggard!
Why is there such sadness deep within you!
The Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet X

Related Blog Posts:
The Time of the Amorites: Part I
The Time of the Amorites: Part II
Sumer
Sumerian History: 3500-1940BC
The Late Bronze Age in the Middle East

The Time of the Amorites: Part I

Ziggurat of Ur

When Anu the Sublime, King of the Anunnaki, and Bel, the lord of Heaven and earth, who decreed the fate of the land, assigned to Marduk, the over-ruling son of Ea, God of righteousness, dominion over earthly man, and made him great among the Igigi, they called Babylon by his illustrious name, made it great on earth, and founded an everlasting kingdom in it, whose foundations are laid as solidly as those of heaven and earth; then Anu and Bel called by name me, Hammurabi, the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the wellbeing of mankind.
The prologue of the Code of Hammurabi rendered by Jon Roland of the Constitution Society

I’ve written about the Sumerian civilisation, from the beginning of Mesopotamian history until the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur in 2004BC (Middle Chronology) and I’ve written a little bit about the Bronze Age Kassites (more to follow about them later) but I haven’t dealt with the intervening period, so here goes.

After the fall of Ur, the kingdom of Elam (located in present day south-western Iran) dominated the south of Mesopotamia. A number of small city-states in Mesopotamia had small kingdoms that negotiated and fought each other, but there was no dominant empire to replace the great Sumerian kingdom of Ur. These cities had had powerful governors during the time of Ur and these now became independent kings. Cities such as Ebla, Mari, Asshur, Babylon, Larsa and Eshnunna were the main centres of power in the Mesopotamian region.

Sumerian now had ceased to be spoken by most of the inhabitants of Mesopotamia and the Semitic language, Akkadian was widely used. Sumerian did however continue to function as the language of learning, much like Latin in the Middle Ages in Western Europe. Scribes would be trained to write in Akkadian, but also to be able to write parallel texts in Sumerian as well. These parallel texts over the next millennia would provide the key to translating Sumerian. The fact that Sumerian is a language isolate means that it would have been almost impossible to translate were it not for the fact that there are numerous parallel texts, creating a multitude of Rosetta Stones as it were.

Cuneiform

A new people group moved into Mesopotamia from the west. The Akkadian word for the west and the western peoples roughly translates as Amurru, so these people have been referred to as the Amorites. It is unclear if this is the same group that are mentioned as inhabiting Canaan in the Bible, as the Hebrew derivation is different. They spoke a Semitic language and had been known in Mesopotamia since around the time of Sargon of Akkad, albeit as nomads on the outskirts.

As the Third Dynasty of Ur collapsed and city states became independent the Amorites moved into the power vacuum and took over many of the cities of Mesopotamia. The language was very similar to Akkadian and they probably had similar gods. In any case they effectively merged with existing Akkadian culture and the scribal tradition continued. In archaeological terms a dark age merely means an era where texts are scarce, regardless of whether civilisation declined in other respects. The continued literary tradition means that although the Amorites were “barbarian invaders” this era is still well-documented. Interestingly the sheer amount of independent cities appear to have made this era the age with the highest literacy in cuneiform writing, with many individuals outside the scribal class being able to write.

Inscription of Yakhdun-Lim, the king ousted by Shamshi-Adad

It is however, quite difficult to categorise the era well. There were a host of small kingdoms and we have a large amount of texts dealing with diplomacy between them. Alliances and betrayals happened with bewildering frequency and dynasties rose and fell like pendulums in a hurricane. Isin was initially dominant in the south before eventually being eclipsed by Larsa, while in the north Mari eventually became more powerful than Ebla.

To the east lay Elam, a powerful kingdom that was a dominant force when the cities were divided but which did not have the resources to fight the cities of Mesopotamia when they were united. To the south lay the marshy sea where the trade with Meluhha (probably the Indus Valley) and other civilisations continued. To the west lay the desert, where pastoral nomads roamed. To the north-west lay the cities of Mari and Ebla in modern day Syria and to the north was the city of Asshur, which was destined to change history but was at the time a small insignificant city.

Mural from the wall of the palace of Mari showing the
Investiture of Zimri Lim after his return

Shamshi-Adad, son of Ila-kabkabi, went to Karduniaš (Babylon) in the time of Naram-Sin. In the eponymy of Ibni-Adad, Shamshi-Adad went up from Karduniaš (Babylon). He took Ekallatum, where he stayed three years. In the eponymy of Atamar-Ištar, Shamshi-Adad went up from Ekallatum. He ousted Erišum, son of Naram-Sin, from the throne and took it. He ruled for 33 years.
Assyrian KingList

Around 1830BC a man called Shamshi-Adad came to power as the ruler of a small city in northern Mesopotamia. Some initial setbacks at the hands of the king of Eshnunna forced him to flee to the minor city of Babylon for a time but soon he had become king of both Ekallatum and Asshur before expelling the prince Zimri-Lim from Mari, after the probable death of his father, and controlling it as well. Shamshi-Adad had forged an empire in the north of Mesopotamia.

To stabilise this empire Shamshi-Adad parcelled out the cities under his rule to his sons, while he remained as overall ruler in his new capital of Shubat-Enlil. He did not get on with his younger son, who had the difficult task of controlling the city of Mari, and the correspondence between the two gives a revealing picture of father-son relationship problems throughout the millennia.

How long do we have to guide you in every matter? Are you a child, and not an adult? Don't you have a beard on your chin? When are you going to take charge of your house? Don't you see that your brother is leading vast armies? So, you too, take charge of your palace, your house!
Letter from Shamshi-Adad to his son Yasmakh-Adad (viceroy of Mari) comparing him to his brother Ishme-Dagan in a none-too-favourable light.

Shamshi-Adad held his empire together until his death but the empire did not long survive its creator. Zimri-Lim returned to Mari after the hapless son of Shamshi-Adad (Yasmakh-Adad) was expelled from Mari, probably by the armies of Eshnunna. Ishme-Dagan managed to hold the core of his father’s empire together but the kingdom was now merely a minor player again. However the fact that Shamshi-Adad had been able to create this empire showed that a strong ruler could potentially unite the warring cities, if they were cunning enough with both swords and letters.

Hammurabi, king of Babylon, mustered his army and marched against Rim-Sin, king of Ur. Hammurabi captured Ur and Larsa and took their property to Babylon.
From the Chronicle of Early Kings

The Code of Hammurabi

Hammurabi was a king of Babylon, which was a small city state that had never previously achieved political prominence. His early reign involved making strong diplomatic contacts with other powerful cities in Mesopotamia, while acknowledging the general overlordship of the king of Elam. The Elamites attacked Eshnunna in an attempt to push their power into the plains of Mesopotamia. Hammurabi seems to have been allied with the Elamites at this time but soon after made an alliance with Larsa to attack and defeat the Elamites before turning on the city of Larsa with the aid of his ally Zimri-Lim of Mari.

“I told you my concerns… Why do I want Hit? Your country’s power lies in donkeys and chariots. My country’s power lies in ships. That is exactly why I really want the bitumen and pitch from that city. Why else would I want the city from him? In return for Hit, I will listen to anything Zimri-Lim asks.”
Hammurabi writing to Zimri-Lim of Mari

In recent history control of resources, particularly oil, has been cited as a cause of wars between states, with many alleging that it was the underlying cause for the latest Gulf Wars. Even Daesh or IS are concerned to seize wells and refineries in Iraq and Syria. The oldest known diplomatic dispute that eventually led to war was actually in this region under Hammurabi. Oil was not used as a fuel source. Before refineries to transmute the petroleum and wells to drill for the easier grade the only oil available was that which oozed from the ground naturally in a sticky tar like bitumen. This tar was used to caulk the river ships that were used for trade along the Tigris and the Euphrates and was a valuable resource. Hammurabi wanted to gain control of the town of Hit, where these bitumen deposits were plentiful. Unfortunately for Hammurabi this town was controlled by his ally Zimri-Lim and there are letters where Hammurabi demands that the town be ceded to him. Zimri-Lim refused and when hostilities later broke out this was undoubtedly a motive for Hammurabi’s attack. This is the first verifiable war fought with petroleum as a possible motive.

Ask the oracles about Hammurabi of Babylon. Will this man ever die? Does he speak honestly with us? Will he declare war? Will he start a siege when I am on campaign in the north? Ask questions about that man. When you have done the questioning once, repeat it and write me all the answers to your questions.
Zimri-Lim of Mari writing to his wife Shibtu asking for oracles about his ally Hammurabi

The ruined ziggurat at Mari

After Larsa was crushed Hammurabi attacked Mari and possibly killed Zimri-Lim. The remaining territory of the city of Asshur paid tribute after this. A later revolt by Mari was crushed by Hammurabi and the city never regained prominence. At the time of Hammurabi’s death he had subjugated most of present day Iraq and most of eastern Syria.

This post has become significantly longer than anticipated so I will break it into two with the second to follow shortly.


Related Blog Posts:
The Time of the Amorites: Part I
The Time of the Amorites: Part II
Sumer
Sumerian History: 3500-1940BC
The Late Bronze Age in the Middle East