Part 21

(M578) As a rule the private houses seem to have been small and to have had a few small rooms. The palaces, or mansions of the great, had much more extensive conveniences. One reads of several specially defined rooms, but their names do not as a rule tell us much of their use. Wash-houses, shops, stables, granaries, and vacant plots, as well as gardens and orchards, are often attached. Apparently one had to leave the house to enter these. The houses were built of brick and their roofs were supported by strong beams. In many plans, while the doorways for internal communication are carefully marked, there seems to be no access from the street. Perhaps this is a peculiarity of the architect’s ideas of a plan, the door to the street being understood. At any rate, doors, bolts, posts, and a lintel are frequently named. These were often put in by the tenant and, like the beams, taken away by him. A door might be pledged alone. But it is possible that some houses had no door proper, being entered by steps leading to the roof. This may be the explanation of the oft-mentioned _mûṣû_ or right of way out, either between, through, or over, other house property. When a house had other houses touching it on each of four sides, something of the kind was necessary.

Probably the house did not usually have an upper story; but, perhaps, as a remarkable exception, an “upper house” is occasionally mentioned. There is reason to think that some were in the form of a quadrangle, around an inner court; as there are wells, or fountains, mentioned as being “within the house.” In some parts of the city, at any rate, the block of buildings was continuous. But there were many streets, and canals also, in the cities. The streets, _suḳê_, were as a rule only narrow lanes or passages. As shown by the excavations at Nippur, houses stood for a long time. When first used, the floors were above the street level, but after the footpaths had been some time in use, they rose to the level of, and finally above, the floor, so that there were steps leading down into the house.(602)

It seems evident that great efforts were made to provide drains for the foundations; and perhaps other sanitary appliances were found in the better class of houses. But we must await more extensive exploration, not necessarily in the more important mounds, before we are able to give a clear account of an ancient Babylonian house.

(M579) In the sale of a house it was often stated that the house was in good condition.(603) In this respect many particulars might be recited, or the whole summed up in one concise phrase. In the early Babylonian documents no good example is yet published in which all the points are mentioned. We must refer to an example of Assyrian times,(604) where all the chief points occur together. Early Babylonian tablets mention nearly all of these items, but only one or two at a time. Thus we have a note that the beams and doors are sound. Wood was scarce, and a tenant usually stipulated to take away the beams and doors, if he put them in. The fact that a man might pledge a door(605) suggests that the modern theory of interchangeable parts was anticipated in Babylonia, so that a door would as a rule fit any house. What the beams were for is far from clear. To carry screens or curtains of skins over a central court seems most likely. Actual roof-beams were probably included in the “roof” itself, which is mentioned separately from the beams. The threshold, or perhaps, rather, the lintel of the doorway, may be meant; and, with the door-posts, be included under beams. The bolt or crossbar of the door is often associated with these beams.

(M580) Streets are more frequently named as boundaries of a house than in any other connection. The “great street,” or “wide street,” occurs continually. Whether this was the main street of Sippara, or only one principal thoroughfare, is not always clear. Streets are often named after a god; thus the street of Lugal-amgaba, of Ishtar, of Bunene, of Bêlit-nuḫshi occur. They were named after people; Immerum the king, or Kât-Ninsaḫ, whose house adjoined the street named after him. The gate of Sin and his garden are named. Canals, especially the _Nâr tupsarrûti_, the _Nâr Bilîa_, are named. Roads, as that to Ishkun-Ishtar, are sometimes given.

(M581) The following is a good example of a deed of sale at the time of the First Dynasty of Babylon,(606) translated literally and illustrating the usual order of words:

One and two-thirds _SAR_ of land built on, next to the house of Nabi-ilishu, and next to the house of Ilushu-ellatzu; upper end, the house of Ḥaiabni-ilu, its exit to that of Immarum, _šar irbitim_ which is his own also; from Nabi-ilishu, Lamazi, the votary of Shamash, daughter of Kasha-Upi, by her written order has bought, its full price in cash has paid. In future, party with party, they shall not dispute. By the name of Shamash, of Marduk, and of Apil-Sin they have sworn.

Then follow the names of five witnesses, but there is no date given.

(M582) The house was in Sippara, since it is known that Nabi-ilishu resided there.(607) The “exit,” that is to say, the front door, opened on the road to the house of Immarum. The scribe means to say that Ḥaiabni-ilu, who was a neighbor, owned the house of Immarum. It appears that Immarum was _šar irbitim_, “king of the four quarters,” a title often borne by Babylonian kings. There is a great probability then that Immarum was no other than the Immerum, once King of Sippara, in the reign of Sumu-lâ-ilu. It is not necessary to suppose him still alive. This deed was executed in the reign of Apil-Sin, whose father, Ṣâbum, had reigned fourteen years after the death of Sumu-lâ-ilu. Further, one of the witnesses, Sin-ublam, is said to be a son of Immerum.

Thus we may conclude that Immarum, or Immerum—the difference in spelling is slight for these times—King of Sippar, bore the title of “king of the four quarters,” and as such was still remembered in Sippara. The exact meaning of the term has been disputed, but Sippara was a fourfold city: Sippar the great, Sippar Amnânu of the goddess Anunitum, Sippar Edinna, and Sippar Iḫrurum are named in the tablets of this dynasty. Perhaps the four quarters of Sippara are meant.

Lamazi, the buyer, daughter of Kasha-Upi, votary of Shamash, bought another house in the nineteenth year of Sinmubaliṭ,(608) borrowed a quantity of lead in the first year of Ḥammurabi,(609) and bought a female slave in a year of Ḥammurabi’s reign, the date of which is not yet fixed.(610) The name Lamazi is common and was borne by several votaries of Shamash whom we know to be daughters of other men than Kasha-Upi. But she may well be the same as the lady who figures without such marks of identity in several other documents. For example, she is named as being a neighbor of Ilushu-ellatzu.(611)

(M583) The phrase _ina šapiriša_, “by her order,” occurs often. It implies that Lamazi acted through an agent, when she borrowed the lead, she acted through a _mâr šipri_, a messenger and agent. She bought her other house in the same way. This does not imply any disability on the part of women to enter into business, for they were as free and competent to act as men. Nor does it arise from her being a votary of Shamash, for these ladies are concerned in by far the larger part of the transactions recorded at Sippara. It is merely the fact that on these occasions, as was frequently done, Lamazi employed a business agent, who is not named. Her father, Kasha-Upi, is referred to again as buying a house from the sons of Nabi-ilushu,(612) where we learn that the latter was a son of Shamash-ina-mâtim and brother of Kasha-Upi. Lamazi was therefore a niece of Nabi-ilushu.

(M584) It will be noted that the price paid for the house is not given. This is often the case. But more commonly the price is named. As Dr. Meissner has already pointed out, prices varied greatly. Houses in a small provincial town like Tell Sifr naturally did not bring the same price as those in Sippara. But variation was probably even more due to situation and size. The lowest price per _SAR_ was four shekels, the highest thirty shekels. This gives a wide margin.

(M585) While there are many examples of the sale of houses in Assyrian times, they do not as a rule exhibit any important peculiarities. The best example comes from Erech(613) and may be taken as a representative specimen:

The house of Ina-êshi-eṭir, son of Nabû-eṭir, a well-built house, furnished with door-frames, a roofed house, the door and crossbar of which are firm, in the quarter of Bît Kuzub-shamê-erṣiti, which is in Erech; upper side next Sulâ, Nabû-nâṣir and Bêl-aḫê-erba, sons of Eṭeru; lower side next Ereshu, son of Shama; upper end next Ṣillâ, son of Nabû-aḫiddin; lower end next Ereshu, son of Nabû-bêlâni; on each side the house of Ina-êshi-eṭir, son of Nabû-eṭir, more or less, so much as there is, for one mina fifteen shekels of silver, as price, he has intrusted to Ereshu. It is given, received, paid for, freed. An exception to the sale cannot be taken, there is no going back, neither shall implead the other. Hereafter, in future, in days to come, neither brothers, sons, family, relations on either side of the house of Ina-êshi-eṭir shall arise and lay claim or cause claim to be laid on this house, shall alter or complain saying [the usual pleas are understood here but omitted]. If so, he shall pay twelvefold. At the sealing of this tablet were present [then follow the names of five witnesses]. Dated in the twentieth year of Ashurbânipal. Ina-êshi-eṭir has impressed his nail-mark in lieu of a seal.

(M586) This example contains a full description of a house. The specification is rarely so full. But doors are always named, as many as six, in one case. Most of the Assyrian deeds of sale mention various adjuncts of the house. Thus the _tar-baṣu_ or “court” is named. This was perhaps an attached walled enclosure.

It is the name given in the Code to the fold where sheep and oxen are kept.(614) Vines might grow in it,(615) and butter was kept there. A _bît kutalli_, or out-house, is named. Often _bît rimki_, or “wash-house,” is also mentioned. This was a chamber within the house, and may be rather meant for lustration, than for ordinary washing. One house had three of these rooms.(616) Sometimes there was a _bûru_, a “well,” or cistern, within the house.(617) A “shop,” or _bît ḳâtâti_, was often attached.(618) Stables, _bît abusate_, are named.(619) What is meant by _bît irši_ is difficult to determine, perhaps some chamber fitted with beds and couches.(620) The _bît akulli_ had a well in it, but what it was is not clear.(621) The _bîtu elîtu_(622) may be an “upper story.” If so, most houses were one-storied only.

(M587) Another interior apartment is called a _kimaḫḫu_. This has usually been taken to be a “tomb.” We know that the old Babylonian kings were buried in the palace of Sargon. But this was when the palace was no longer the abode of the living. Ashurbânipal’s charter to his faithful general and tutor-in-arms, Nabû-shar-uṣur,(623) seems to contemplate that general’s being buried in the palace, though this is not certain. However, the explorations of Nippur demonstrate the existence of vaults for burial, built over with brickwork. It may be that such vaults did exist within the house, and were sold with it.

A “portico,” _bît mutirrêti_, is named once.(624) Beside the “great house,” _bîtu dannu_, or _bitannu_, a “second house,” _bît šanû_, is mentioned. The exit from the house, _mûṣû_, a way to the street, was often named, being very important where the house was bounded on four sides by others.

(M588) Most of the houses, of which we have deeds of sale, were situated in Nineveh itself. Occasionally, the house is shut in by more than three others, most often only by three. Then the fourth side is said or implied to be on the street. Hence, we may be sure that in parts of Nineveh, there were continuous blocks of houses, on each side of a street. Sometimes, however, we have a garden, or orchard, as one boundary.

(M589) Contrary to the practice in Babylonia, the size of the house is rarely given. We have the size of the _bîtu akulli_ given, in one case,(625) as forty-three cubits long and twenty cubits broad. What seem to be the dimensions of an ordinary house were twenty-two by fourteen cubits.(626)

(M590) Houses in Assyria sold for from half a mina up to twelve minas; but as long as we are so ignorant of the form, nature, and dimensions of the house and its adjuncts, the information is of very little interest.

(M591) A number of other buildings or parcels of land were sold with houses or separately. Thus, we read of a _papaḫu_, or chamber, which was beneath an adjoining beer-shop.(627) The beer-shop is often mentioned, and was a state-regulated institution.

(M592) A term which was long somewhat of a puzzle, the _ki-gallu_, usually written _Ê-KI-GÀL_, or _Ê-KI-DAN_, is shown definitely by the Code(628) to be a plot of uncultivated land. This might be rented for cultivation and was not necessarily poor land, for it was expected to yield ten _GUR_ per _GAN_. But it might also lie in a city bounded on four sides by houses,(629) or, as often, by three houses and the street. It was then, of course, a building site. Its price was usually about two shekels per _SAR_, but might be as high as eight shekels per _SAR_.(630)

(M593) Another common object of sale was a building called _Ê KISLAḤ_, shown by the Code(631) to be really a “granary,” or barn, read _maškanu_. These are usually in the city, and the prices paid for them varied from one-third of a shekel(632) to fifteen shekels(633) per _SAR_. They might be surrounded by houses on all four sides, or by a canal, road, and street.(634)

(M594) These examples serve to show that _bîtu_ as often denoted a “plot” of land as a “house.”(635) In Assyrian times we find the same usage. A fairly common object of sale is what I take to be a “fuller’s field,” or a “bleaching ground,” _bîtu ḳaḳḳiri pûṣê_. It was usually in the city, of small size, given in cubits each way, or a trifle over a homer in area. It was near a stream. It sold for a very high price. Once we find half of it used as a garden. It seemed to have been fenced in. Unfortunately, no one example is perfectly preserved; and the deeds are of no special interest beyond the peculiar nature of the plot.(636)

(M595) The gardens in the time of the First Dynasty of Babylon are generally said to be planted with dates, and sold for “full” price. Once two shekels are given for a garden of fifteen _SAR_.

(M596) There are not many examples of these sales in Assyrian times, but they give some welcome information. There is nothing peculiar about the sale formula. The only interest is in the specifications. The garden is usually said to be planted with the _iṣu tillit_, almost certainly “the vine.” Hence, we may regard them as “vineyards.” The number of plants in them is often given, being as high as two thousand four hundred.(637) Of other plants grown in a Babylonian garden we can recognize with more or less certainty in The Garden Tablet,(638) garlic, onion, leek, kinds of lettuce, dill, cardamom, saffron, coriander, hyssop, mangold, turnip, radish, cabbage, lucerne, assafœtida, colocynth.

Other gardens are said to be _kirû urḳîtu_, “vegetable gardens.” In later times the date-plantations are continually in evidence. Beyond the specification, “planted with dates,” and certain obscure references to the condition of the crop at the time of sale, there is nothing to be noted.

(M597) The sales of fields are very numerous. They were usually situated outside the city walls, in the _ugaru_, or townland. They were not, however, reckoned outside the “town.” For the town extended beyond its walls, like a parish in England; and was bounded, as a rule, by adjoining towns. In the case of Sippara, many of these _ugarê_ are named; but as a rule, the names do not explain themselves. Thus, Azarim, Ḥiganim, and Shikat Malkat may be named after persons or temples. Other names, like Shutpalu, Nagû, Iblê, Tapirtum, may well be significant. Certainly, Ebirtim appears to mean “across” the Euphrates. Once the field is said to be in Sippara,(639) once in Ḥalḫalla,(640) but we cannot press these statements to mean “within the walls” of those cities. Usually, the boundaries of a field are four other fields, with now and then a road, or canal. The price per _SAR_ varied from one-thirtieth of a shekel(641) to more than a mina. Very frequently, indeed, the price is simply said to be “full.”

(M598) The fields in Assyrian times are often mentioned. Nearly always when a field, _eḳlu_, is sold, it is somewhere else referred to as _bîtu_, or plot, usually of so many homers in size. There is nothing distinctive about the sale formula. The specifications give most interesting and valuable data as to the topography of the land around Nineveh.(642) The accessories of a field may be named. Sometimes it was corn-land, _šê zêr_, part was _tabrû_, “open land,” part _adru_, enclosed by a wall or fence. Pits or wells, canals or ditches, courts or folds, occur frequently as adjuncts of a field.

(M599) Larger estates are built up of the simple elements which we have noted. Sometimes the estate was so large as to be styled a “city,” _alu šê_. These “cities” are generally called after the name of some one, probably a former owner. But the number of people sold in them does not justify the use of any larger designation than “hamlet.” A large estate, with a few people on it, obviously its bailiffs and the serfs of its landlord, constituted the _alu_. Hence, this term, like _bîtu_, must have a wider signification than that usually given it. Such hamlets were, doubtless, the germs of future cities, but the term evidently denotes simply a settled abode of a group of people.

(M600) From very early times the Babylonians drew plans of estates, which are in many ways very instructive. The seated statue of Gudea, found by De Sarzec at Telloh, has a plan of his city upon a tablet on his lap, accompanied by a scale of dimensions or a standard of length.(643)

Professor Oppert, Dr. Eisenlohr, M. Thureau-Dangin, and others have discussed at length the plan of a field,(644) which has the sides of several plots given in linear measure and the areas in square measure. From this was obtained a great variety of results regarding the relations between the measures.(645)

XXIII. Loans And Deposits

(M601) In the first epoch there are many examples of loans. The characteristic word _ŠU-BA-TI_, or _ŠU-BA-AN-TI_, which means “he has borrowed,” has been used as a title and they are often called _ŠUBATI_ tablets. They are the receipts given for the loans by the borrowers. Here is an example:

“Sixty _GUR_ of corn, royal quality, from L have been received by B.” Date. Seal of borrower.

In place of corn we may have money, dates, wool, or almost anything. Sometimes a date for repayment is given. In the examples there are usually no references to the interest to be paid for the loan. They may be regarded as advances made to temple tenants, or serfs, to be repaid at harvest from crops.

(M602) The greatest value of these tablets lies in their dates. The dates are usually events. Many of these have already been collected and registered, especially by Dr. H. Radau.(646) But there is even more to be done, when further examples are published. Many tablets contain two dates referring to loans contracted at different times. By this means the sequence can gradually be determined. The seals are also of great interest and often of value, as may be seen from Dr. Radau’s work.

(M603) Advances of all sorts were freely made both with and without interest. For convenience we may separate money from corn loans and advances of all kinds of commodities; but we must not forget that corn, at any rate, was legal tender; and silver loans might be repaid in corn. This, however, was early recognized as an inconvenience and it is quite common to find a direct stipulation that what was lent shall be repaid in kind. It soon became usual to state that if the loan was repaid otherwise, it must be according to a fixed ratio between silver and corn.

(M604) A very large number of loans take the form of _Abstract schuldscheine_, loans without statement of any cause for the debt. They are merely promises to pay, that is, acknowledgments of indebtedness. Thus we read: “Five shekels of silver which A has given to B. On such a date B shall pay five shekels of silver to A.” A penalty may be added for not paying on the fixed date. Usually this takes the form of interest. The rate is one shekel _per mina_ each month, or twelve shekels _per mina yearly_, that is, twenty per cent. There is no clear case of money lent as an investment to bear interest. That was done in quite another way. The lender entered into relationship with an agent, to whom he furnished capital and who traded with the money and repaid it with interest.

(M605) Most of the loans were evidently contracted to meet temporary embarrassment. Usually it was in connection with the need of cash to pay the expenses at harvest-time. The loan was then repaid at harvest. It might be repaid in corn.(647) The time was usually short—fifteen days is named.(648) The lender had his reward in obtaining his money’s worth in corn, when its price was cheapest. But he was evidently not expected to charge interest. A similar kind of loan is half a mina of silver to pay the price of a piece of land. Here the money was lent until the land was bought, and was to be repaid with interest of three _GUR_ of corn.(649) So half a mina for certain land to be paid, when the land was cultivated.(650)

(M606) Another reason for borrowing was the need of money to pay taxes, _ana ilkim suddanim_.(651) In one of these cases the stipulation is added that the borrower shall bring the receipt of the tax-collector and then may take back his bonds.(652) Here the “sealed tablet” is in one case the receipt for the tax, in the other the receipt which the borrower gave for his loan. But there is no mention of his repayment. Perhaps the lender owed the tax, half a mina, and as it was a considerable sum, sent it by a third party, but made him give a receipt for it. But such a receipt would differ in no respect from the sort of bond mentioned above, and would render the messenger liable to repay the money; so he was to have his receipt back, on handing over the tax-collector’s receipt showing that he had paid the tax.