Part 36 (1/2)

Ashurbanipal kept up the friends.h.i.+p, and, when a famine broke out in Elam, allowed some (M822) (M823) Elamites to take refuge in his land, and afterwards restored them to their country. He also sent grain into Elam itself. But, perhaps as consequence of having spied out the land, the Elamites contrived to make Urtaku attack a.s.syria. He was incited to this act by Bel-i?isha, prince of the Gambulai, who inhabited the marshes about the mouth of the Uknu, or Blue River, perhaps the modern Karoon, bordering on Elam. Bel-i?isha rebelled against a.s.syria, and with his troops joined Elam. Nabu-shum-eresh, the _TIK-EN-NA_, apparently sheik of the district of Dupliash, another a.s.syrian subject, seems to have done the same.

Marduk-shum-ibni, the general of Urtaku, who led the invasion, was evidently not an Elamite, but perhaps a Chaldean, or renegade Babylonian.

At any rate, the Elamites invaded Akkad and covered the land like gra.s.shoppers. They laid siege to Babylon. On the approach of the a.s.syrian army, the invaders fled. Urtaku died. Bel-i?isha was killed by a wild boar. Nabu-shum-eresh was smitten with dropsy and died. ”In one year the G.o.ds cut them off.” The throne of Elam fell to Teumman, a brother of Urtaku, who maintained a hostile att.i.tude. Dunanu, son and successor of Bel-i?isha, joined Teumman. Ashurbanipal accordingly invaded Elam, defeated and slew Teumman, ravaged the land of Gambulu and captured Dunanu, who was taken to Nineveh and made to march in the triumphal procession, with the head of Teumman slung about his neck, and was finally tortured to death.

(M824) All the time that Shamash-shum-ukin was king in Babylon, Ashurbanipal seems to have retained the rule over Southern Babylonia. At any rate, the governors of the cities there wrote to him as their king and lord. The above-mentioned revolt in Gambulu was a direct concern of the governor of Erech, who seems to have suffered severely. As late as the twentieth year of Ashurbanipal, Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+ was governor there. We have many letters from him to the king. One(909) refers to the above events:

To the king of countries, my lord, thy servant Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+.

Erech and E-anna (the temple of Ishtar at Erech), be gracious to the king of countries, my lord. Daily I pray to Ishtar of Erech and Nana for the well-being of the life of the king, my lord. The king, my lord, sent, saying, ”Take troops and send against Gambulu. The G.o.ds of the king, my lord, a.s.suredly know how, from the time that Bel-i?isha revolted from the hands of the king, my lord, and went to Elam, he plundered my father's house and went about to kill my brother.”

Then comes a break, in which the fragments indicate that Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+ prayed daily for revenge. Then we read:

Now as the king, my lord, has sent, I will go and fulfil all his bidding. If on any ground, over there, the inhabitants of Gambulu will not obey, if it be pleasing to the king, my lord, let a messenger come and let us a.s.semble all Akkad and we will go with him, we will win back the land and give it to the king, my lord. I have sent. Let the king, my lord, do what he will. Preserve this letter.

The last request is very unusual, but we are glad it was obeyed. Another of his letters refers to the intrigues of Pir'-Bel, son of Bel-e?ir. This Bel-e?ir may be the son of Nabu-shum-eresh, who, with his brother, Nabu-na'id, was carried captive to Nineveh, along with Dunanu, and there made to desecrate the bones of their father. But it seems possible that we have here to do with another Bel-e?ir, as these events seem earlier in the history. After the same introduction as before, the letter(910) reads:

Pir'-Bel, the son of Bel-e?ir, sometime after he and his father went, some ten years ago, to Elam, came again from Elam to Akkad, he and his father. When they came, whatever was evil against a.s.syria, they kept on doing in Erech. Afterwards when they went back to Elam, Bel-e?ir, his father, died in Elam; and he in Marchesvan brought letters to me, and to Aplia, the governor, we sent the letters on by Daru-Sharru, the body-guard.

After some broken lines:

”Now a certain servant of ... came with him to Erech.”

we read:

If he say to the king, my lord: ”I have come from the land of Elam,” let not the king, my lord, believe him. From the time when in the month of Marchesvan, he brought the letters and we sent them to the king, my lord, until now, he has not returned to Elam.

If the king, my lord, desire to verify these words, Idua, a servant of Kudur, who brought him to Erech, the contents are known to him [_there are some very obscure phrases in the next two lines_], and those letters, what lies are written, let him tell the king, my lord, and as to those letters, which, in the month of Marchesvan we sent to the king, my lord, by the hands of Daru-sharru, if the king, my lord, does not understand, let the king, my lord, ask Daru-sharru, the body-guard. To the king, my lord, I have sent, let the king, my lord, be aware.

(M825) One event, very characteristic of the times, is the subject of three letters. The sanctuary of Ishtar, at Erech, was celebrated far and wide, and on one occasion the King of Elam sent gifts to it. These Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+ seems to have been unable to possess himself of, or to send to the king. Thus, we read:(911)

To the king of countries, my lord, thy servant, Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+ [_after the same introduction as before_]; the sheep of the temple and of the city Pu?udu are detained in the city Ru'ua, two shepherds of them, one belonging to the temple, and the second from Pu?udu, three white horses with harness and trappings of silver, and fittings of bronze. On the trappings were written ...

which the King of Elam had sent to Ishtar of Erech. The horses, which they brought, I will now preserve. Before the king, my lord, I was afraid and in the temple I will not place them, until the shepherds bring the three horses. To the king, my lord, I have sent, and the bronze inscribed fittings, when I see them, I will send on to the king, my lord. What the king my lord will, let him do.

The king replied:(912)

To Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+, concerning the horses about which thou didst send, as yet thou hast not sent them to me. I have sent Ashur-gimil-tirru, the _abarakku_, and troops with him. Whatever is good to do, that do; whether the River ?arru be dammed, or whether those people come, and as to the contents of the letter which thou didst send. Bel-e?ir, Arbaia, the colonels, two hundred horses in their hands, I have sent to thee; let them stand on your side, let them do the work.

Evidently in consequence of this, we have another letter,(913) where both writer and recipient are unknown. It is much injured, and while there are a few sentences intelligible, it is not easy to say to what they refer.

But on the reverse after the first six or seven lines, the words of the last letter are repeated verbatim. It is perhaps another letter from the king to Nabu-ushabs.h.i.+. The governors of La?iru and Arba?a are said to be with the receiver of the letter.

IX. Miscellaneous a.s.syrian Letters