STELA POTVRDJUJE LEGENDU O DVA SUNCA.KOLIKO ZNAMO O ISTORIJI SRBA,SAMIM TIM I LJUDSKOG RODA,CIVILIZACIJI KOJA JE BAR 1.000 GODINA SAKRIVANA OD NAS. Further evidence relates a story of King Ur-Nammu of the Third Dynasty of Ur (2044 to 2007 BC) on a 5 x10′ stele Figure VI.2. STELE OF NARAM SIN (Louvre, Paris) One or two priests sat on the throne of Lagash in brief succession, and then arose to power the famous Urukagina, the first reformer in history. He began to rule as patesi, but afterwards styled himself king. What appears certain is that he was the leader of a great social upheaval, which received the support of a section of the priesthood, for he recorded that his elevation was due to the intercession of the god Nin-Girsu. Other deities, who were sons and daughters of Nin-Girsu and Nina, had been given recognition by his predecessors, and it is possible that the orthodox section of Lagash, and especially the agricultural classes, supported the new ruler in sweeping away innovations to which they were hostile. Like Khufu and his descendants, the Pyramid kings of Egypts fourth dynasty, the vigorous and efficient monarchs of the Ur-Nina dynasty of Lagash were apparently remembered and execrated as tyrants and oppressors of the people. To maintain many endowed temples and a standing army the traders and agriculturists had been heavily taxed. Each successive monarch who undertook public works on a large scale for the purpose of extending and developing the area under cultivation, appears to have done so mainly to increase the revenue of the exchequer, so as to conserve the strength of the city and secure its pre-eminence as a metropolis. A leisured class had come into existence, with the result that culture was fostered and civilization advanced. Lagash seems to have been intensely modern in character prior to 2800 B.C., but with the passing of the old order of things there arose grave social problems which never appear to have been seriously dealt with. All indications of social unrest were, it would appear, severely repressed by the iron-gloved monarchs of Ur-Ninas dynasty. The people as a whole groaned under an ever-increasing burden of taxation. Sumeria was overrun by an army of officials who were notoriously corrupt; they do not appear to have been held in check, as in Egypt, by royal auditors. In the domain of Nin-Girsu, one of Urukaginas tablets sets forth, there were tax gatherers down to the sea. They not only attended to the needs of the exchequer, but enriched themselves by sheer robbery, while the priests followed their example by doubling their fees and appropriating temple offerings to their own use. The splendid organization of Lagash was crippled by the dishonesty of those who should have been its main support. Reforms were necessary and perhaps overdue, but, unfortunately for Lagash, Urukaginas zeal for the peoples cause amounted to fanaticism. Instead of gradually readjusting the machinery of government so as to secure equality of treatment without impairing its efficiency as a defensive force in these perilous times, he inaugurated sweeping and revolutionary social changes of far-reaching character regardless of consequences. Taxes and temple fees were cut down, and the number of officials reduced to a minimum. Society was thoroughly disorganized. The army, which was recruited mainly from the leisured and official classes, went practically out of existence, so that traders and agriculturists obtained relief from taxation at the expense of their material security. Urukaginas motives were undoubtedly above reproach, and he showed an example to all who occupied positions of trust by living an upright life and denying himself luxuries. He was disinterestedly pious, and built and restored temples, and acted as the steward of his god with desire to promote the welfare and comfort of all true worshippers. His laws were similar to those which over two centuries afterwards were codified by Hammurabi, and like that monarch he was professedly the guardian of the weak and the helper of the needy; he sought to establish justice and liberty in the kingdom. But his social Arcadia vanished like a dream because he failed to recognize that Right must be supported by Might. In bringing about his sudden social revolution, Urukagina had at the same time unwittingly let loose the forces of disorder. Discontented and unemployed officials, and many representatives of the despoiled leisured and military classes of Lagash, no doubt sought refuge elsewhere, and fostered the spirit of revolt which ever smouldered in subject states. At any rate, Umma, remembering the oppressions of other days, was not slow to recognize that the iron hand of Lagash had become unnerved. The zealous and iconoclastic reformer had reigned but seven years when he was called upon to defend his people against the invader. He appears to have been utterly unprepared to do so. The victorious forces of Umma swept against the stately city of Lagash and shattered its power in a single day. Echoes of the great disaster which ensued rise from a pious tablet inscription left by a priest, who was convinced that the conquerors would be called to account for the sins they had committed against the great god Nin-Girsu. He lamented the butchery and robbery which had taken place. We gather from his composition that blood was shed by the raiders of Umma even in the sacred precincts of temples, that statues were shattered, that silver and precious stones were carried away, that granaries were plundered and standing crops destroyed, and that many buildings were set on fire. Amidst these horrors of savagery and vengeance, the now tragic figure of the great reformer suddenly vanishes from before our eyes. Perhaps he perished in a burning temple; perhaps he found a nameless grave with the thousands of his subjects whose bodies had lain scattered about the blood-stained streets. With Urukagina the glory of Lagash departed. Although the city was rebuilt in time, and was even made more stately than before, it never again became the metropolis of Sumeria. The vengeful destroyer of Lagash was Lugal-zaggisi, Patesi of Umma, a masterful figure in early Sumerian history. We gather from the tablet of the unknown scribe, who regarded him as a sinner against the god Nin-Girsu, that his city goddess was named Nidaba. He appears also to have been a worshipper of Enlil of Nippur, to whose influence he credited his military successes. But Enlil was not his highest god, he was the interceder who carried the prayers of Lugal-zaggisi to the beloved father, Anu, god of the sky. No doubt Nin-Girsu represented a school of theology which was associated with unpleasant memories in Umma. The sacking and burning of the temples of Lagash suggests as much. Having broken the power of Lagash, Lugal-zaggisi directed his attention to the rival city of Kish, where Semitic influence was predominating. When Nanizak, the last monarch of the line of the famous Queen Azag-Bau, had sat upon the throne for but three years, he perished by the sword of the Umma conqueror. Nippur likewise came under his sway, and he also subdued the southern cities. Lugal-zaggisi chose for his capital ancient Erech, the city of Anu, and of his daughter, the goddess Nana, who afterwards was identified with Ishtar. Anus spouse was Anatu, and the pair subsequently became abstract deities, like Anshar and Kishar, their parents, who figure in the Babylonian Creation story. Nana was worshipped as the goddess of vegetation, and her relation to Anu was similar to that of Belit-sheri to Ea at Eridu. Anu and Ea were originally identical, but it would appear that the one was differentiated as the god of the waters above the heaven and the other as god of the waters beneath the earth, both being forms of Anshar. Elsewhere the chief god of the spring sun or the moon, the lover of the goddess, became pre-eminent, displacing the elder god, like Nin-Girsu at Lagash. At Sippar the sun god, Babbar, whose Semitic name was Shamash, was exalted as the chief deity, while the moon god remained supreme at Ur. This specializing process, which was due to local theorizing and the influence of alien settlers, has been dealt with in a previous chapter. In referring to himself as the favoured ruler of various city deities, Lugal-zaggisi appears as a ruler of all Sumeria. How far his empire extended it is impossible to determine with certainty. He appears to have overrun Akkad, and even penetrated to the Syrian coast, for in one inscription it is stated that he made straight his path from the Lower Sea (the Persian Gulf) over the Euphrates and Tigris to the Upper Sea (the Mediterranean). The allegiance of certain states, however, depended on the strength of the central power. One of his successors found it necessary to attack Kish, which was ever waiting for an opportunity to regain its independence. According to the Chronicle of Kish, the next ruler of Sumer and Akkad after Lugal-zaggisi was the famous Sargon I. It would appear that he was an adventurer or usurper, and that he owed his throne indirectly to Lugal-zaggisi, who had dethroned the ruler of Akkad. Later traditions, which have been partly confirmed by contemporary inscriptions, agree that Sargon was of humble birth. In the previous chapter reference was made to the Tammuz-like myth attached to his memory. His mother was a vestal virgin dedicated to the sun god, Shamash, and his father an unknown stranger from the mountains--a suggestion of immediate Semitic affinities. Perhaps Sargon owed his rise to power to the assistance received by bands of settlers from the land of the Amorites, which Lugal-zaggisi had invaded. According to the legend, Sargons birth was concealed. He was placed in a vessel which was committed to the river. Brought up by a commoner, he lived in obscurity until the Semitic goddess, Ishtar, gave him her aid. A similar myth was attached in India to the memory of Karna, the Hector of that great Sanskrit epic the Mahabharata. Kamas mother, the Princess Pritha, who afterwards became a queen, was loved by the sun god, Surya. When in secret she gave birth to her son she placed him in an ark of wickerwork, which was set adrift on a stream. Ultimately it reached the Ganges, and it was borne by that river to the country of Anga, where the child was rescued by a woman and afterwards reared by her and her husband, a charioteer. In time Karna became a great warrior, and was crowned King of Anga by the Kaurava warriors.[147] Before he became king, Sargon of Akkad, the Sharrukin of the texts, was, according to tradition, a gardener and watchman attached to the temple of the war god Zamama of Kish. This deity was subsequently identified with Merodach, son of Ea; Ninip, son of Enlil; and Nin-Girsu of Lagash. He was therefore one of the many developed forms of Tammuz--a solar, corn, and military deity, and an interceder for mankind. The goddess of Kish appears to have been a form of Bau, as is testified by the name of Queen Azag-Bau, the legendary founder of the city. Unfortunately our knowledge of Sargons reign is of meagre character. It is undoubted that he was a distinguished general and able ruler. He built up an empire which included Sumer and Akkad, and also Amurru, the western land, or land of the Amorites. The Elamites gave him an opportunity to extend his conquests eastward. They appear to have attacked Opis, but he drove them back, and on more than one occasion penetrated their country, over the western part of which, known as Anshan, he ultimately imposed his rule. Thither went many Semitic settlers who had absorbed the culture of Sumeria. During Sargons reign Akkad attained to a splendour which surpassed that of Babylon. In an omen text the monarch is lauded as the highly exalted one without a peer. Tradition relates that when he was an old man all the Babylonian states rose in revolt against him and besieged Akkad. But the old warrior led forth his army against the combined forces and achieved a shattering victory. Manishtusu, who succeeded Sargon I, had similarly to subdue a great confederacy of thirty-two city states, and must therefore have been a distinguished general. But he is best known as the monarch who purchased several large estates adjoining subject cities, his aim having been probably to settle on these Semitic allies who would be less liable to rebel against him than the workers they displaced. For the latter, however, he found employment elsewhere. These transactions, which were recorded on a monument subsequently carried off with other spoils by the Elamites and discovered at Susa, show that at this early period (about 2600 B.C.) even a conquering monarch considered it advisable to observe existing land laws. Urumush,[148] the next ruler, also achieved successes in Elam and elsewhere, but his life was cut short by a palace revolution. The prominent figure of Naram Sin, a later king of Akkad, bulks largely in history and tradition. According to the Chronicle of Kish, he was a son of Sargon. Whether he was or not, it is certain that he inherited the military and administrative genius of that famous ex-gardener. The arts flourished during his reign. One of the memorable products of the period was an exquisitely sculptured monument celebrating one of Naram Sins victories, which was discovered at Susa. It is one of the most wonderful examples of Babylonian stone work which has come to light. A successful campaign had been waged against a mountain people. The stele shows the warrior king leading his army up a steep incline and round the base of a great peak surmounted by stars. His enemies flee in confusion before him. One lies on the ground clutching a spear which has penetrated his throat, two are falling over a cliff, while others apparently sue for mercy. Trees have been depicted to show that part of the conquered territory is wooded. Naram Sin is armed with battleaxe and bow, and his helmet is decorated with horns. The whole composition is spirited and finely grouped; and the military bearing of the disciplined troops contrasts sharply with the despairing attitudes of the fleeing remnants of the defending army. During this period the Semitized mountaineers to the north-east of Babylonia became the most aggressive opponents of the city states. The two most prominent were the Gutium, or men of Kutu, and the Lulubu. Naram Sins great empire included the whole of Sumer and Akkad, Amurru and northern Palestine, and part of Elam, and the district to the north. He also penetrated Arabia, probably by way of the Persian Gulf, and caused diorite to be quarried there. One of his steles, which is now in the Imperial Ottoman Museum at Constantinople, depicts him as a fully bearded man with Semitic characteristics. During his lifetime he was deified--a clear indication of the introduction of foreign ideas, for the Sumerians were not worshippers of kings and ancestors. Naram Sin was the last great king of his line. Soon after his death the power of Akkad went to pieces, and the Sumerian city of Erech again became the centre of empire. Its triumph, however, was shortlived. After a quarter of a century had elapsed, Akkad and Sumer were overswept by the fierce Gutium from the north-eastern mountains. They sacked and burned many cities, including Babylon, where the memory of the horrors perpetrated by these invaders endured until the Grecian Age. An obscure period, like the Egyptian Hyksos Age, ensued, but it was of comparatively brief duration. When the mists cleared away, the city Lagash once more came to the front, having evidently successfully withstood the onslaughts of the Gutium, but it never recovered the place of eminence it occupied under the brilliant Ur-Nina dynasty. It is manifest that it must have enjoyed under the various overlords, during the interval, a considerable degree of independence, for its individuality remained unimpaired. Of all its energetic and capable patesis, the most celebrated was Gudea, who reigned sometime before 2400 B.C. In contrast to the Semitic Naram Sin, he was beardless and pronouncedly Sumerian in aspect. His favoured deity, the city god Nin-Girsu, again became prominent, having triumphed over his jealous rivals after remaining in obscurity for three or four centuries. Trade flourished, and the arts were fostered. Gudea had himself depicted, in one of the most characteristic sculptures of his age, as an architect, seated reverently with folded hands with a temple plan lying on his knees, and his head uplifted as if watching the builders engaged in materializing the dream of his life. The temple in which his interests were centred was erected in honour of Nin-Girsu. Its ruins suggest that it was of elaborate structure and great beauty. Like Solomon in later days, Gudea procured material for his temple from many distant parts--cedar from Lebanon, marble from Amurru, diorite from Arabia, copper from Elam, and so forth. Apparently the King of Lagash was strong enough or wealthy enough to command respect over a wide area. Another city which also rose into prominence, amidst the shattered Sumerian states, was Ur, the centre of moon worship. After Gudeas death, its kings exercised sway over Lagash and Nippur, and, farther south, over Erech and Larsa as well. This dynasty endured for nearly a hundred and twenty years, during which Ur flourished like Thebes in Egypt. Its monarchs styled themselves as Kings of the Four Regions. The worship of Nannar (Sin) became officially recognized at Nippur, the seat of Enlil, during the reign of King Dungi of Ur; while at Erech, the high priest of Anu, the sky god, became the high priest of the moon god. Apparently matriarchal ideas, associated with lunar worship, again came into prominence, for the king appointed two of his daughters to be rulers of conquered states in Elam and Syria. In the latter half of his reign, Dungi, the conqueror, was installed as high priest at Eridu. It would thus appear that there was a renascence of early Sumerian religious ideas. Ea, the god of the deep, had long been overshadowed, but a few years before Dungis death a temple was erected to him at Nippur, where he was worshipped as Dagan. Until the very close of his reign, which lasted for fifty-eight years, this great monarch of tireless activity waged wars of conquest, built temples and palaces, and developed the natural resources of Sumer and Akkad. Among his many reforms was the introduction of standards of weights, which received divine sanction from the moon god, who, as in Egypt, was the measurer and regulator of human transactions and human life. To this age also belongs many of the Sumerian business and legal records, which were ultimately carried off to Susa, where they have been recovered by French excavators. About half a century after Dungis death the Dynasty of Ur came to an end, its last king having been captured by an Elamite force. At some time subsequent to this period, Abraham migrated from Ur to the northern city of Harran, where the moon god was also the chief city deity--the Baal, or lord. It is believed by certain Egyptologists that Abraham sojourned in Egypt during its Twelfth Dynasty, which, according to the Berlin system of minimum dating, extended from about 2000 B.C. till 1780 B.C. The Hebrew patriarch may therefore have been a contemporary of Hammurabis, who is identified with Amraphel, king of Shinar (Sumer) in the Bible.[149] But after the decline of Urs ascendancy, and long before Babylons great monarch came to the throne, the centre of power in Sumeria was shifted to Isin, where sixteen kings flourished for two and a quarter centuries. Among the royal names, recognition was given to Ea and Dagan, Sin, Enlil, and Ishtar, indicating that Sumerian religion in its Semitized form was receiving general recognition. The sun god was identical with Ninip and Nin-Girsu, a god of fertility, harvest, and war, but now more fully developed and resembling Babbar, the shining one, the solar deity of Akkadian Sippar, whose Semitic name was Shamash. As Shamash was ultimately developed as the god of justice and righteousness, it would appear that his ascendancy occurred during the period when well-governed communities systematized their religious beliefs to reflect social conditions. The first great monarch of the Isin dynasty was Ishbi-Urra, who reigned for thirty-two years. Like his successors, he called himself King of Sumer and Akkad, and it appears that his sway extended to the city of Sippar, where solar worship prevailed. Traces of him have also been found at Eridu, Ur, Erech, and Nippur, so that he must have given recognition to Ea, Sin, Anu, and Enlil. In this period the early national pantheon may have taken shape, Bel Enlil being the chief deity. Enlil was afterwards displaced by Merodach of Babylon. Before 2200 B.C. there occurred a break in the supremacy of Isin. Gungunu, King of Ur, combined with Larsa, whose sun temple he restored, and declared himself ruler of Sumer and Akkad. But Isin again gathered strength under Ur-Ninip, who was not related to his predecessor. Perhaps he came from Nippur, where the god Ninip was worshipped as the son of Bel Enlil. According to a Babylonian document, a royal grandson of Ur-Ninips, having no direct heir, selected as his successor his gardener, Enlil-bani. He placed the crown on the head of this obscure individual, abdicated in his favour, and then died a mysterious death within his palace. It is highly probable that Enlil-bani, whose name signifies Enlil is my creator, was a usurper like Sargon of Akkad, and he may have similarly circulated a myth regarding his miraculous origin to justify his sudden rise to power. The truth appears to be that he came to the throne as the leader of a palace revolution at a time of great unrest. But he was not allowed to remain in undisputed possession. A rival named Sin-ikisha, evidently a moon worshipper and perhaps connected with Ur, displaced the usurper, and proclaimed himself king. After a brief reign of six months he was overthrown, however, by Enlil-bani, who piously credited his triumph over his enemy to the chief god of Nippur, whose name he bore. Although he took steps to secure his position by strengthening the fortifications of Isin, and reigned for about a quarter of a century, he was not succeeded by his heir, if he had one. King Zambia, who was no relation, followed him, but his reign lasted for only three years. The names of the next two kings are unknown. Then came Sin-magir, who was succeeded by Damik-ilishu, the last King of Isin. Towards the close of Damik-ilishus reign of twenty-four years he came under the suzerainty of Larsa, whose ruler was Rim Sin. Then Isin was captured by Sin-muballit, King of Babylon, the father of the great Hammurabi. Rim Sin was an Elamite. Afterwards the old order of things passed away. Babylon became the metropolis, the names of Sumer and Akkad dropped out of use, and the whole country between the rivers was called Babylonia.[150] The various systems of law which obtained in the different states were then codified by Hammurabi, who appointed governors in all the cities which came under his sway to displace the patesis and kings. A new national pantheon of representative character was also formed, over which Merodach (Marduk), the city god of Babylon, presided. How this younger deity was supposed to rise to power is related in the Babylonian legend of Creation, which is dealt with in the next chapter.[151] In framing this myth from the fragments of older myths, divine sanction was given to the supremacy achieved by Merodachs city. The allegiance of future generations was thus secured, not only by the strong arm of the law, but also by the combined influence of the reorganized priesthoods at the various centres of administration. An interesting problem, which should be referred to here, arises in connection with the sculptured representations of deities before and after the rise of Akkad as a great Power. It is found, although the Sumerians shaved their scalps and faces at the dawn of the historical age, that they worshipped gods who had long hair and also beards, which were sometimes square and sometimes pointed. At what period the Sumerian deities were given human shape it is impossible to determine. As has been shown (Chapters II and III) all the chief gods and goddesses had animal forms and composite monster forms before they became anthropomorphic deities. Ea had evidently a fish shape ere he was clad in the skin of a fish, as an Egyptian god was simply a bull before he was depicted in human shape wearing a bulls skin. The archaic Sumerian animal and composite monster gods of animistic and totemic origin survived after the anthropomorphic period as mythical figures, which were used for decorative or magical purposes and as symbols. A form of divine headdress was a cap enclosed in horns, between which appeared the soaring lion-headed eagle, which symbolized Nin-Girsu. This god had also lion and antelope forms, which probably figured in lost myths--perhaps they were like the animals loved by Ishtar and referred to in the Gilgamesh epic. Similarly the winged bull was associated with the moon god Nannar, or Sin, of Ur, who was a horned steer. On various cylinder seals appear groups of composite monsters and rearing wild beasts, which were evidently representations of gods and demons in conflict. Suggestive data for comparative study is afforded in this connection by ancient Egypt. Sokar, the primitive Memphite deity, retained until the end his animal and composite monster forms. Other gods were depicted with human bodies and the heads of birds, serpents, and crocodiles, thus forming links between the archaic demoniac and the later anthropomorphic deities. A Sumerian example is the deified Ea-bani, who, like Pan, has the legs and hoofs of a goat. The earliest representations of Sumerian humanized deities appear on reliefs from Tello, the site of Lagash. These examples of archaic gods, however, are not bearded in Semitic fashion. On the contrary, their lips and cheeks are shaved, while an exaggerated chin tuft is retained. The explanation suggested is that the Sumerians gave their deities human shape before they themselves were clean shaven, and that the retention of the characteristic facial hair growth of the Mediterranean Race is another example of the conservatism of the religious instinct. In Egypt the clean-shaven Pharaohs, who represented gods, wore false chin-tuft beards; even Queen Hatshepsut considered it necessary to assume a beard on state occasions. Ptah-Osiris retained his archaic beard until the Ptolemaic period. It seems highly probable that in similarly depicting their gods with beards, the early Sumerians were not influenced by the practices of any alien people or peoples. Not until the period of Gudea, the Patesi of Lagash, did they give their gods heavy moustaches, side whiskers, and flowing beards of Semitic type. It may be, however, that by then they had completely forgotten the significance of an ancient custom. Possibly, too, the sculptors of Lagash were working under the influence of the Akkadian school of art, which had produced the exquisite stele of victory for Naram-Sin, and consequently adopted the conventional Semitic treatment of bearded figures. At any rate, they were more likely to study and follow the artistic triumphs of Akkad than the crude productions of the archaic period. Besides, they lived in an age when Semitic kings were deified and the Semitic overlords had attained to great distinction and influence. The Semitic folks were not so highly thought of in the early Sumerian period. It is not likely that the agricultural people regarded as models of gods the plunderers who descended from the hills, and, after achieving successes, returned home with their spoils. More probably they regarded them as foreign devils. Other Semites, however, who came as traders, bringing wood, stone, and especially copper, and formed communities in cities, may well have influenced Sumerian religious thought. The god Ramman, for instance, who was given recognition all through Babylonia, was a god of hill folks as far north as Asia Minor and throughout Syria. He may have been introduced by settlers who adopted Sumerian habits of life and shaved scalp and face. But although the old cities could never have existed in a complete state of isolation from the outer world, it is unlikely that their inhabitants modelled their deities on those worshipped by groups of aliens. A severe strain is imposed on our credulity if we are expected to believe that it was due to the teachings and example of uncultured nomads that the highly civilized Sumerians developed their gods from composite monsters to anthropomorphic deities. Such a supposition, at any rate, is not supported by the evidence of Ancient Egypt.
Posted on: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 20:24:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015