16 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS 



much as the latter does not bear the title of king, we may l see therein a confirma- 

 tion of the legend 2 of Sargon, 1. 2, a-bi ul i-di aim abi-ia i-ra-mi sha-da-a, "my 

 father I know not, whereas the brother of my father inhabits the mountain," viz., that 

 Sargon, being of an inferior birth on his father's side, was a usurper. 



My use of Shargdni-shar-dli as identical with Shar-gi-na — known from the in- 

 scriptions of INYbuna'id as the father of Naram-Sin — requires a word of explanation. 

 Sayce, 3 Hommel 4 and Tiele 5 have never called in question the identity of the two 

 names, reading the name of our king as Shar-ga-ni, and regarding shar dli as his first 

 title. Similarly Pinches distinguished between the name and the title, at first 6 inter- 

 preting the latter with Menant as lugal-lag, "the messenger king," but afterwards 7 

 with Hommel as shar dli, "king of the city." Menant 8 and Oppert, on the contrary, 

 believe that Shar-ga-ni-shar-liih (Menant), or Shar(Bin)-ga-ni-shar-imsi (Oppert"), 

 or Shar(IBr, Bin)-ga-ni-shar-ali (Oppert 10 ) is to be regarded as one word, contain- 

 ing only the name of the king. More recently Winckler, 11 adopting Oppert's view, 

 reads the name Sliar-ga-ni-shar-malidzi. He considers the identity of this name with 

 Sargon as an open question, whilst Oppert holds it to be simply an inadmissible 

 plaisanterie? 2 It is not clear to me what induced Oppert to regard Shar-ga-ni as 

 identical with Bin-ga-ni}'' The syllabic value of bin for the sign SHAR is unproven, 

 and in itself improbable. 11 On the other hand, I share the view of Oppert-Menant in 



1 This conclusion is very probable, but not absolutely certain, as the title of king is very frequently omitted when 

 the names of the fathers of Cassite kings are referred to, although they are known to have been "kings." 



'' Although evidently containing history interwoven with legend, it is nevertheless historically important, as giving 

 expression to the Babylonian conception of the history of the ancient Sargon. Its value increases in proportion as 

 we find in it statements which are proven from other sources to be correct. Incidentally, it may be remarked that on 

 account of the mention of the father's brother in the "Legend," and because of Sargon's own statement concerning 

 Itti-Bel, the clause abi ul Idi can only be regarded as meaning that Sargon did not know his father personally, since 

 the latter was dead (Tiele, I. c, p. 114), or for various reasons was compelled to keep himself in concealment. 



3 Cf. e. g., R. P 1 . I, p. 5 



4 I.e., p. 302 seq. 



5 I. c, p. 488, note 1. 



6 P. S. B. A. VI, pp. 11-13, 68 seq. Cf. V, pp. 8, 9, 12 ; VII, pp. 65-71. Trans. S. B. A. VIII. pp. 347-351. 



7 P. S. B. A.. VIII, pp. 243 seq. 



s liecherehes sur la Glyptique orientate, p. 74. P. 8. B. A. January 5, 1884. 

 9 Collection de Olercq., No. 46, p. 50. 



10 Z. A. Ill, p. 124. 



11 Gescli., pp. 39, 327, and Schrader's K B. Ill, Part 1, p. 101 **. Cf. Unters., p. 44 seq. 



'- Z. A. Ill, p. 124. Ibid. : " quoique roi d'Agade, il n'est pas plus Sargon, que les empereurs Louis et Lolhaire ne 

 sont un meme personnage." Winckler's article in Revue d' Assyriologie II (quoted in Unters., p. 79, note 4), was un- 

 fortunately not accessible to me. 



13 In the name Bi-in-ga-ni-shar-ali on a seal cylinder, published by Menant, Glyptique I, PI. I, No. 1. Cf. Winckler, 

 Altbabylonisehe Keilschriftlexte (quoted as A. E.), No. 66. 



14 Even if it was proved that SHAR has the value of bin in a few cases, it would be utterly impossible to give the 

 character this exceptional value in a Semitic word list (V E. 41, 1. 29, a, b). Cf. p. 18, note 4. 



