Part 22 (1/2)
Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatyau (the ”Twin Aswins” = Castor and Pollux)--whose names have been deciphered by Winckler. These G.o.ds were also imported into India by the Vedic Aryans. The Mitanni tribe (the military aristocracy probably) was called ”Kharri”, and some philologists are of opinion that it is identical with ”Arya”, which was ”the normal designation in Vedic literature from the Rigveda onwards of an Aryan of the three upper cla.s.ses”.[293] Mitanni signifies ”the river lands”, and the descendants of its inhabitants, who lived in Cappadocia, were called by the Greeks ”Mattienoi”. ”They are possibly”, says Dr. Haddon, ”the ancestors of the modern Kurds”,[294] a conspicuously long-headed people, proverbial, like the ancient Aryo-Indians and the Gauls, for their hospitality and their raiding propensities.
It would appear that the Mitannian invasion of northern Mesopotamia and the Aryan invasion of India represented two streams of diverging migrations from a common cultural centre, and that the separate groups of wanderers mingled with other stocks with whom they came into contact. Tribes of Aryan speech were a.s.sociated with the Ka.s.site invaders of Babylon, who took possession of northern Babylonia soon after the disastrous. .h.i.tt.i.te raid. It is believed that they came from the east through the highlands of Elam.
For a period, the dating of which is uncertain, the Mitannians were overlords of part of a.s.syria, including Nineveh and even a.s.shur, as well as the district called ”Musri” by the a.s.syrians, and part of Cappadocia. They also occupied the cities of Harran and Kadesh.
Probably they owed their great military successes to their cavalry.
The horse became common in Babylon during the Ka.s.site Dynasty, which followed the Hammurabi, and was there called ”the a.s.s of the east”, a name which suggests whence the Ka.s.sites and Mitannians came.
The westward movement of the Mitannians in the second millennium B.C.
may have been in progress prior to the Ka.s.site conquest of Babylon and the Hyksos invasion of Egypt. Their relations in Mesopotamia and Syria with the Hitt.i.tes and the Amorites are obscure. Perhaps they were for a time the overlords of the Hitt.i.tes. At any rate it is of interest to note that when Thothmes III struck at the last Hyksos stronghold during his long Syrian campaign of about twenty years' duration, his operations were directly against Kadesh on the Orontes, which was then held by his fierce enemies the Mitannians of Naharina.[295]
During the Hyksos Age the horse was introduced into Egypt. Indeed the Hyksos conquest was probably due to the use of the horse, which was domesticated, as the Pumpelly expedition has ascertained, at a remote period in Turkestan, whence it may have been obtained by the horse-sacrificing Aryo-Indians and the horse-sacrificing ancestors of the Siberian Buriats.
If the Mitanni rulers were not overlords of the Hitt.i.tes about 1800 B.C., the two peoples may have been military allies of the Ka.s.sites.
Some writers suggest, indeed, that the Ka.s.sites came from Mitanni.
Another view is that the Mitannians were the Aryan allies of the Ka.s.sites who entered Babylon from the Elamite highlands, and that they afterwards conquered Mesopotamia and part of Cappadocia prior to the Hyksos conquest of Egypt. A third solution of the problem is that the Aryan rulers of the Mitannian Hitt.i.tes were the overlords of northern Babylonia, which they included in their Mesopotamian empire for a century before the Ka.s.sites achieved political supremacy in the Tigro-Euphrates valley, and that they were also the leaders of the Hyksos invasion of Egypt, which they accomplished with the a.s.sistance of their Hitt.i.te and Amoritic allies.
The first Ka.s.site king of Babylonia of whom we have knowledge was Gandash. He adopted the old Akkadian t.i.tle, ”king of the four quarters”, as well as the t.i.tle ”king of Sumer and Akkad”, first used by the rulers of the Dynasty of Ur. Nippur appears to have been selected by Gandash as his capital, which suggests that his war and storm G.o.d, Shuqamuna, was identified with Bel Enlil, who as a ”world giant” has much in common with the northern hammer G.o.ds. After reigning for sixteen years, Gandash was succeeded by his son, Agum the Great, who sat on the throne for twenty-two years. The great-grandson of Agum the Great was Agum II, and not until his reign were the statues of Merodach and his consort Zerpanitu? brought back to the city of Babylon. This monarch recorded that, in response to the oracle of Shamash, the sun G.o.d, he sent to the distant land of Khani (Mitanni) for the great deity and his consort. Babylon would therefore appear to have been deprived of Merodach for about two centuries. The Hitt.i.te-Mitanni raid is dated about 1800 B.C., and the rise of Gandash, the Ka.s.site, about 1700 B.C. At least a century elapsed between the reigns of Gandash and Agum II. These calculations do not coincide, it will be noted, with the statement in a Babylonian hymn, that Merodach remained in the land of the Hatti for twenty-four years, which, however, may be either a priestly fiction or a reference to a later conquest. The period which followed the fall of the Hammurabi Dynasty of Babylonia is as obscure as the Hyksos Age of Egypt.
Agum II, the Ka.s.site king, does not state whether or not he waged war against Mitanni to recover Babylon's G.o.d Merodach. If, however, he was an ally of the Mitanni ruler, the transference of the deity may have been an ordinary diplomatic transaction. The possibility may also be suggested that the Hitt.i.tes of Mitanni were not displaced by the Aryan military aristocracy until after the Ka.s.sites were firmly established in northern Babylonia between 1700 B.C. and 1600 B.C. This may account for the statements that Merodach was carried off by the Hatti and returned from the land of Khani.
The evidence afforded by Egypt is suggestive in this connection. There was a second Hyksos Dynasty in that country. The later rulers became ”Egyptianized” as the Ka.s.sites became ”Babylonianized”, but they were all referred to by the exclusive and sullen-Egyptians as ”barbarians”
and ”Asiatics”. They recognized the sun G.o.d of Heliopolis, but were also concerned in promoting the wors.h.i.+p of Sutekh, a deity of sky and thunder, with solar attributes, whom Rameses II identified with the ”Baal” of the Hitt.i.tes. The Mitannians, as has been stated, recognized a Baal called Teshup, who was identical with Tarku of the Western Hitt.i.tes and with their own tribal Indra also. One of the Hyksos kings, named Ian or Khian, the Ianias of Manetho, was either an overlord or the ally of an overlord, who swayed a great empire in Asia. His name has been deciphered on relics found as far apart as Knossos in Crete and Baghdad on the Tigris, which at the time was situated within the area of Ka.s.site control. Apparently peaceful conditions prevailed during his reign over a wide extent of Asia and trade was brisk between far-distant centres of civilization. The very term Hyksos is suggestive in this connection. According to Breasted it signifies ”rulers of countries”, which compares with the Biblical ”Tidal king of nations”, whom Sayce, as has been indicated, regards as a Hitt.i.te monarch. When the Hitt.i.te hieroglyphics have been read and Mesopotamia thoroughly explored, light may be thrown on the relations of the Mitannians, the Hitt.i.tes, the Hyksos, and the Ka.s.sites between 1800 B.C. and 1500 B.C. It is evident that a fascinating volume of ancient history has yet to be written.
The Ka.s.sites formed the military aristocracy of Babylonia, which was called Karduniash, for nearly six centuries. Agum II was the first of their kings who became thoroughly Babylonianized, and although he still gave recognition to Shuqamuna, the Ka.s.site G.o.d of battle, he re-exalted Merodach, whose statue he had taken back from ”Khani”, and decorated E-sagila with gifts of gold, jewels, rare woods, frescoes, and pictorial tiles; he also re-endowed the priesthood. During the reign of his successor, Burnaburiash I, the Dynasty of Sealand came to an end.
Little is known regarding the relations between Elam and Babylonia during the Ka.s.site period. If the Ka.s.site invaders crossed the Tigris soon after the raid of the Mitannian Hitt.i.tes they must have previously overrun a great part of Elam, but strongly situated Susa may have for a time withstood their attacks. At first the Ka.s.sites held northern Babylonia only, while the ancient Sumerian area was dominated by the Sealand power, which had gradually regained strength during the closing years of the Hammurabi Dynasty. No doubt many northern Babylonian refugees reinforced its army.
The Elamites, or perhaps the Ka.s.sites of Elam, appear to have made frequent attacks on southern Babylonia. At length Ea-gamil, king of Sealand, invaded Elam with purpose, no doubt, to shatter the power of his restless enemies. He was either met there, however, by an army from Babylon, or his country was invaded during his absence. Prince Ulamburiash, son of Burnaburiash I, defeated Ea-gamil and brought to an end the Sealand Dynasty which had been founded by Ilu-ma-ilu, the contemporary and enemy of Samsu-la-ilu, son of Hammurabi. Ulamburiash is referred to on a mace-head which was discovered at Babylon as ”king of Sealand”, and he probably succeeded his father at the capital. The whole of Babylonia thus came under Ka.s.site sway.
Agum III, a grandson of Ulamburiash, found it necessary, however, to invade Sealand, which must therefore have revolted. It was probably a centre of discontent during the whole period of Ka.s.site ascendancy.
After a long obscure interval we reach the period when the Hyksos power was broken in Egypt, that is, after 1580 B.C. The great Western Asiatic kingdoms at the time were the Hitt.i.te, the Mitannian, the a.s.syrian, and the Babylonian (Ka.s.site). Between 1557 B.C. and 1501 B.C. Thothmes I of Egypt was a.s.serting his sway over part of Syria.
Many years elapsed, however, before Thothmes III, who died in 1447 B.C., established firmly, after waging a long war of conquest, the supremacy of Egypt between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean coast as far north as the borders of Asia Minor.
”At this period”, as Professor Flinders Petrie emphasizes, ”the civilization of Syria was equal or superior to that of Egypt.” Not only was there in the cities ”luxury beyond that of the Egyptians”, but also ”technical work which could teach them”. The Syrian soldiers had suits of scale armour, which afterwards were manufactured in Egypt, and they had chariots adorned with gold and silver and highly decorated, which were greatly prized by the Egyptians when they captured them, and reserved for royalty. ”In the rich wealth of gold and silver vases”, obtained from captured cities by the Nilotic warriors, ”we see also”, adds Petrie, ”the sign of a people who were their (the Egyptians') equals, if not their superiors in taste and skill.”[296] It is not to be wondered at, therefore, when the Pharaohs received tribute from Syria that they preferred it to be carried into Egypt by skilled workmen. ”The keenness with which the Egyptians record all the beautiful and luxurious products of the Syrians shows that the workmen would probably be more in demand than other kinds or slave tribute.”[297]
One of the monarchs with whom Thothmes III corresponded was the king of a.s.syria. The enemies of Egypt in northern Mesopotamia were the Hitt.i.tes and Mitannians, and their allies, and these were also the enemies of a.s.syria. But to enable us to deal with the new situation which was created by Egypt in Mesopotamia, it is necessary in the first place to trace the rise of a.s.syria, which was destined to become for a period the dominating power in Western Asia, and ultimately in the Nile valley also.
The a.s.syrian group of cities grew up on the banks of the Tigris to the north of Babylonia, the mother country. The following Biblical references regarding the origins of the two states are of special interest:--
Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and j.a.pheth.... The sons of Ham: Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.... And Cush begat Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of s.h.i.+nar. Out of that land went forth a.s.shur and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city. The children of Shem: Elam and a.s.shur ... (_Genesis_, x, 1-22). The land of a.s.syria ... and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof (_Micah_, v, 6).
It will be observed that the Sumero-Babylonians are Cus.h.i.+tes or Hamites, and therefore regarded as racially akin to the proto-Egyptians of the Mediterranean race--an interesting confirmation of recent ethnological conclusions.
Nimrod, the king of Babel (Babylon), in s.h.i.+nar (Sumer), was, it would appear, a deified monarch who became ultimately identified with the national G.o.d of Babylonia. Professor Pinches has shown[298] that his name is a rendering of that of Merodach. In Sumerian Merodach was called Amaruduk or Amarudu, and in the a.s.syro-Babylonian language Marduk. By a process familiar to philologists the suffix ”uk” was dropped and the rendering became Marad. The Hebrews added ”ni” = ”ni-marad”, a.s.similating the name ”to a certain extent to the 'niphal forms' of the Hebrew verbs and making a change”, says Pinches, ”in conformity with the genius of the Hebrew language”.
a.s.shur, who went out of Nimrod's country to build Nineveh, was a son of Shem--a Semite, and so far as is known it was after the Semites achieved political supremacy in Akkad that the a.s.syrian colonies were formed. a.s.shur may have been a subject ruler who was deified and became the G.o.d of the city of a.s.shur, which probably gave its name to a.s.syria.
According to Herodotus, Nineveh was founded by King Ninus and Queen Semiramis. This lady was reputed to be the daughter of Derceto, the fish G.o.ddess, whom Pliny identified with Atargatis. Semiramis was actually an a.s.syrian queen of revered memory. She was deified and took the place of a G.o.ddess, apparently Nina, the prototype of Derceto.
This Nina, perhaps a form of Damkina, wife of Ea, was the great mother of the Sumerian city of Nina, and there, and also at Lagash, received offerings of fish. She was one of the many G.o.ddesses of maternity absorbed by Ishtar. The Greek Ninus is regarded as a male form of her name; like Atargatis, she may have become a bis.e.xual deity, if she was not always accompanied by a shadowy male form. Nineveh (Ninua) was probably founded or conquered by colonists from Nina or Lagash, and called after the fish G.o.ddess.