256 OLD BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS 



inscriptions very strongly. In the inscriptions of Edingiranagin, or Edingiranatum, 1 

 the grandson of Ur-Nina, a city, generally transliterated as Is-ban 1 ', plays a very 

 important role. In fact the annihilation of the power of this city in S. Babylonia is the 

 one prominent feature which characterizes his government, and to which (in connection 

 with Erech, Ur and some other cities) the king refers again and again. 2 The most 

 interesting object yet found in Tello, the so-called stele of vultures, was doubtless set 

 up by this sovereign in commemoration of his great victory over ^'''BAN 1 ''. 3 How- 

 ever this may be, so much is certain that at some time previous to Edingiranagin, a 

 foreign power whose centre was ""''BAN'''', had succeeded in invading and conquering 

 a large portion, if not the whole, of Babylonia, Erech and Ur included. The same 

 city of ""'BAN 11 is also mentioned in the long Nippur text No. 87, and here again it 

 occurs in connection with Erech and Ur (and Larsam). We learn at the same time 

 from this very important historical document that Lugalzaggisi, son of a certain Ukush 

 "patesi of ""'BAN''" 1 (col. I, 3,<), 10) had conquered all Babylonia and established 

 an empire extending from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea, in size there- 

 fore not inferior to that founded much later by Sargon I. This first "king of the 

 world" (lugal Jcalama, col. I, 4, 36-11, col. Ill, 4.) of whom Babylonian documents 

 give us information, selected Erech as his capital, and by his great achievements raised 

 ""''BAN 1 ', his native city, "to great power" (a mag rnu-um-gur, col. II, 41f). The 

 two documents, Nippur, No. 87, and the stele of vultures from Tello, belong closely 

 together and supplement each other, the one giving a resume of the rise and height of 

 the power and influence of ""'BAN*', the other illustrating its downfall. The former 

 must therefore antedate the monument of Edingiranagin. As doubtless some time 

 elapsed between the rise and downfall of this foreign power ; as, moreover, Shirpurla 

 is not mentioned in Lugalzaggisi's inscription, apparently because it did not as yet 

 exercise any political influence ; 5 and finally as palseographically this inscription from 

 Nippur shows more traces of originality than the texts of Urukagina and Ur-Nina, as 



1 In view of De Sarzec, I. c, PL 31, No. 2, col. Ill, 5 (E dingira-na-tum-ma= "Brought into the house of his 

 god " (by his parents after his birth). 



3 Cf. De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 3, Fragm. A, col. I, 5, 8, col. II, 4, 13, col. Ill, 5 ; PL 4, Fragni. A, col. II, 2, 11 : 

 Fragm. B, col. Ill, 3, col. V, 4 ; PI. 31, No. 2, col. I, 6. 



3 For details cf. Heuzey's explanation of the figurative representations in his work, Les Origines Orientates. 

 pp. 49-84, and in De Sarzec, I. c, pp. 174-184. I agree with this scholar that the people whose defeat is illustrated on 

 this monument belong to the city (and country) of c^BAN*' (De Sarzec, I. c, pp. 183). 



4 This was the original reading of 1. 10 ; the traces preserved on two fragments establish my text restoration of 

 this line beyond doubt. 



"The fragment of an inscribed object, apparently dedicated by a king of ff'«''BAN'« to Ningirsu, was found in 

 Tello (De Sarzec, I. c, PL 5, No. 3, and p. 119). From the character used for "king" I draw the conclusion (with 

 Heuzey) that the object belongs to a somewhat later period. Apparently s's'lBANfc' played a second important role in 

 the Babylonian history. 



